Bacon's DictionaryAppendices

2 Samuel Ireland. Mr. Ireland’s Vindication to the Critical Labours of Mr. Malone, 1796

 

That our bard had a great antipathy to the removal of the relics of the dead is not improbable; since, in the gravediggers’ scene in Hamlet, the remarks are so appropriate to the subject, and highly expressive of his detestation of such conduct.

Mr. Ireland visited the site of-the ground whereon stood Shakespeare’s mansion, which was called New Place, and was burned down at the great fire, which took place at Stratford-on-Avon, and is now walled round.

It was in the garden belonging to these premises that the mulberry tree stood; which was felled, many years since, by its then churlish owner, who conceived himself too much importuned by the curiosity of strangers desirous of visiting the tree planted by the hand of Shakespeare. That our poet must have retired from London with a very handsome competence there can be little doubt, as this very New Place, wherein he had resided, was during the civil wars selected by Charles the First and his queen to be their residence during the continuance of the court at the town of Stratford-on-Avon.

On visiting the lovely mansion which had given birth to our immortal dramatist, Hart the butcher, the descendant of our bard by the female line, was still living. After much conversation with the old man, Mr. S. Ireland proceeded to make a correct drawing of the kitchen, wherein it is more than probable our great poet must have frequently been seated.

A delineation was then taken of a little parlour adjoining; over the chimney-piece of which was a representation in plaster of David and Goliath, encircled with two rude poetical lines, which were then in the modern hand, but had been lately altered from the black-letter characters in which they had originally appeared.

It was in the tiling of this very house that the discovery was made of a profession of faith stated to be from the pen of John Shakespeare, the father of our bard, to which I shall allude on a future occasion.

At a period when the Shakespearian manuscripts were in their zenith, I was given to understand, that, by the death of old Hart, the descendant of Shakespeare, the tenement at Stratford-on-Avon which had witnessed the birth of our immortal bard was to be sold: in consequence of which I made application, by letter, to the attorney at Stratford-on-Avon who was appointed to dispose of the dwelling: and for a period it was really my intention, could I have made it convenient, to become the purchaser of the mansion in question, as nothing at that period would have afforded me so much gratification as the being in possession of the avowed birth-place of Shakespeare.

A correspondence between myself and the attorney, relative to the purchase, in consequence took place; after which the affair gradually died away.

In consequence of the various inquiries set on foot by Mr. Ireland during his continuance at Stratford-on-Avon, he was at length given to understand, by some of the oldest inhabitants, that a tale was formerly told indicatory of some manuscripts having been conveyed for safety, at the time of the fire at Stratford, from New Place (the former residence of Shakespeare) to Clopton House, situated at a little distance from the scene of the conflagration. In consequence of this intelligence Mr. Ireland proceeded to the mansion in question; which proved to be of great antiquity.

In one chamber was a very curious carved bedstead of oak, with silk hangings. This, together with all the furniture of the apartment, was an heirloom to the premises; having been the gift of King Henry the Seventh to Sir Hugh Clopton, who was one of the lord-mayors of London during the reign of that monarch.

In this antique mansion were innumerable chambers furnished in a similar manner, many of them totally darkened to obviate the expense of the tax upon window-lights; and in the cockloft were piles of mouldering household goods, all of the same remote antiquity: among the rest was an emblazoned representation, on vellum, of Queen Elizabeth, the wife of Henry the Seventh, as she lay in state in the chapel of the tower of London, after having died in childbed; which curious relic the then owner of Clopton House gave to Mr. S. Ireland, as a “picture which was in his opinion of no service, because, being on vellum, it would not do to light the fire.”

Near the cockloft just mentioned was a garret, the walls of which were adorned with rude paintings of scriptural subjects, hieroglyphically characters, and quotations from the New Testament. Among the designs, I recollect a large fish was delineated as being caught, and a hand drawing the string which was attached to the hook in the fish’s mouth. Under this curious design were the following lines of rude poetry in black-letter characters: they may be found in Weever’s Funeral Monuments.

 

Whether you rise early

Or go to bed late,

Remember Christ Jesus

That died for your sake.

 

From the inquiries made by Mr. Ireland, we were given to understand that Sir Hugh Clopton, or his descendant, being a very staunch catholic, had gained permission to have this garret consecrated at the time of the reformation, that the celebration of mass might take place in secret.

Having thus far digressed in my statement respecting the antiquity and great curiosity of this  mansion, I shall again revert back to the general subject, and say,

 

IF TRUE, WHAT A CONFLAGRATION!

 

The person who occupied Clopton House, and rented the lands belonging to the estate, was what is usually denominated a gentleman-farmer; rich in gold and the worldly means of accumulating wealth, but devoid of every polished refinement.

On Mr. Ireland’s arrival he introduced himself to Mr. Williams (for such was the gentleman’s name); who invited us into a a small gloomy parlour; where he was shortly given to understand, by Mr. Ireland, that the motive of his visit was a desire to ascertain whether any old deeds or manuscripts were then existing, in any part of the mansion: and on a further statement, as to any papers of Shakespeare’s being extant, the following was the reply made by Mr. Williams: “By God I wish you had arrived a little sooner! Why, it isn’t a fortnight since I destroyed several baskets-full of letters and papers, in order to clear a small chamber for some young partridges which I wish to bring up alive: and as to Shakespeare, why there were many bundles with his name wrote upon them. Why it was in this very fire-place I made a roaring bonfire of them.”

Mr. Ireland’s feelings during this address, which were fully displayed in his countenance, may be more easily conceived than expressed: and it was with infinite difficulty he suffered Mr. Williams to proceed thus far; when, starting from his chair, he clasped his hands together, exclaiming “My God! Sir, you are not aware of the loss which the world has sustained. Would to heaven I had arrived sooner!”

As my father concluded this ejaculation, Mr. Williams, calling to his wife, who was in an adjoining chamber, and who instantly came into the apartment where we were seated (being a very respectable elderly lady), he thus addressed her: “My dear, don’t you remember bringing me down those baskets of papers from the partridge-room? And that I told you there were some about Shakespeare the poet?”

The old lady immediately replied as follows, having, in all probability, heard Mr. Ireland’s address to her husband: “Yes, my dear, I do remember it perfectly well; and, if you will call to mind my words, I told you not to burn the papers, as they might be of consequence.”

Mr. Ireland, after expressing his regrets, requested permission to inspect the small chamber in question; which, however, contained nothing but the partridges. Having expressed a desire to go over the house, two lanterns were ordered up; when every chamber underwent the strictest scrutiny; during which research the before-mentioned furniture, chapel, &c, came under our cognisance; but as to Shakespearian manuscripts, not a line was to be found.

As the cottage was still standing from whence our bard had married Anne Hathaway, we repaired to the village of Shotery, near Stratford, where it is situate; still having for our guide the indefatigable Jordan, the Stratford poet. After making a drawing of the premises, Mr. S. Ireland conversed for a considerable length of time with its then possessors; from whom he purchased a bugle purse, said to have been a present from our great poet to the object of his choice; as also an old oak chair wherein it was stated our bard was used to sit, during his courtship, with his Anne upon his knee. The Shakespearian chair, 3 which had a place in Mr. Ireland’s study on being conveyed to London, was perfectly well known to all the inspectors of the manuscripts; many of whom I have often seen seated therein to hear the perusal of the papers; and their settled physiognomies have frequently excited in me a desire for laughter which it has required every effort on my part to restrain.

As I have before mentioned Jordan the Stratford poet, I shall give the following transcript from his own manuscript, still in my possession, without any alteration of language, spelling, &c. Having merely to state, that we took a ramble to Bitford, mentioned in the account so delivered, where Mr. S. Ireland made a very correct drawing of Shakespeare’s crab tree, and another of the town of Bitford; both of which appeared in his Warwickshire Avon.

Jordan’s Manuscript: The following Anecdote of Shakespeare is from a traditional Story as well authenticated as things of this nature generally are. I shall therefore not hesitate relating it as it was Verbally delivered to me. Our Poet was extremely fond of drinking hearty draughts of English Ale and glory’d in being thought a person of superior eminence in that profession if I may be allowed the phrase. In his time but at what period it is not recorded there were two Companies or fraternity of Village Yeomanry who used frequently to associate together at Bidford a town pleasantly situate on the banks of the Avon about 7 Miles below Stratford, and who boasted themselves Superior in the Science of drinking to any set of equal number in the Kingdom and hearing the fame of our Bard it was determined to Challenge him and his Companions to a trial of their skill which the Stratfordians accepted and accordingly repaired to Bidford which place agreeable to both parties was to be the Scene of Contention. But when Shakespeare and his Companions arrived at the destined spot to their disagreeable disappointment they found the Topers were gone to Evesham fair and were told that if they had a mind to try their strength with the Sippers, they were there ready for the Contest, Shakespeare and his companions made a Scoff at their Opponents but for want of better Company they agreed to the Contest and in a little time our Bard and his Companions got so intolerable intoxicated that they was not able to Contend any longer and accordingly set out on their return to Stratford. But had not got above half a mile on the road near they found themselves unable to proceed any farther, and was obliged to lie down under a Crabtree which is still growing by the side of the road where they took up their repose till morning when some of the Company roused the poet and entreated him to return to Bidford and renew the contest which he declined saying:

 

I have drank with Piping Pebworth, Dancing Marston,

Haunted Hillborough, Hungry Grafton

and ageing Exhall, Papist Wixford,

Beggarly Broom and Drunken Bidford.

 

These eight villages, which are all perceptible from the elevated ground on which the crab tree stands, retain to the present hour the several appellations given to them in the above four lines.

At the period of the signature of my articles, Mr. Bingley had one hackney-writer who constantly attended at chambers, as well as the celebrated Foster Powell, the pedestrian, who was occupied in carrying such letters about the town as Mr. Bingley’s business required.

After some months the hackney-writer was discharged, and shortly after the death of Foster Powell occurred, when I was left alone at chambers; to which circumstance I attribute in a great measure the scope which was afforded me in the after production of the manuscripts for, had there been any companion with me in chambers, it would have been utterly impossible that I should have accomplished the fabrication which on a subsequent occasion met the public view.

About six months previous to my attempting the Shakespearian papers, when I had not the smallest idea of embarking in that most arduous undertaking, I happened to purchase a small quarto tract, written by a gentleman of Lincoln’s Inn, and dedicated by him to Queen Elizabeth.

The work in question contained a set of prayers, and was adorned round the margin of each page with a very spirited wood-cut border, in the style of Queen Elizabeth’s prayer-book; a work well known to all collectors of curious volumes of that nature.

These borders were carefully emblazoned, and the tract bound in vellum, with Elizabeth’s arms stamped in gold on the cover, together with various other ornaments.

As the work was dedicated to the Queen, and as from the appearance of the internal emblazoning, covers, &c, it had very probably once belonged to the library of that Queen, I determined on endeavouring to establish it as the presentation copy from the author, whose name has now altogether escaped my recollection.

In order to compass this, I weakened some common ink with water; and on a piece of old paper wrote a dedicatory epistle, as if from the author, to Elizabeth, requesting her gracious acceptance and countenance of his work.

This letter I thrust between the vellum cover and the paper, which had originally stuck to it but had then given way: but previous to my presentation of it to Mr. Ireland, I went to a bookbinder of the name of Laurie, who had bound many books for me, and resided in New Inn Passage, within two minutes’ walk of the gentleman’s chambers under whom I was articled to study the law as a chancery conveyancer.

To this Mr. Laurie I produced the letter in question; and, as a proof that I had no very bad intention in having penned it, I unequivocally told him, with a smile, that I had just executed it, and was desirous of seeing how far Mr. Ireland would accredit it. I should have mentioned that two journeymen were present, and heard my unreserved conversation on the subject.

Having requested to know what he thought of its appearance, Mr. Laurie stated, that it certainly seemed to him as if written many years back when one of the journeymen, looking at the manuscript, informed me that he could give me a mixture that would resemble old ink much more than that which I had used; and, in consequence of my request, he immediately mixed together in a phial three different liquids used by bookbinders in marbling the covers of their calf bindings. These ingredients being shaken up produced a fermentation; when, the froth having subsided, the liquid was of a dark brown colour.

The young man then wrote his name with this mixture, but it was very faint on the paper; however, on holding it for a few seconds before the fire, the ink gradually assumed a very dark brown appearance. Having paid him for his trouble, I wrote the dedicatory letter, and then presented it with the book to Mr. Ireland, who had no doubt as to its authenticity. It was with the same ink I afterwards wrote the Shakespearian manuscripts.

Their scorched appearance originated in my being compelled to hold them to the fire, as before stated; and as I was constantly fearful of interruption, I sometimes placed them so near the bars as to injure the paper; which was done in order to complete and conceal them as speedily as possible from any unexpected person who might come suddenly into the chambers.

At a period when the public mind was occupied with the Shakespearian papers, and the daily newspapers teemed with paragraphs on the subject; when I was in the middle of my career, my ink failed me; and although hazardous the procedure, I positively applied to the very same journeyman in Mr. Laurie’s shop, who for a shilling prepared a second bottle of the before-mentioned ink; which circumstance was never mentioned either by Mr. Laurie or his workman, although the fame of the manuscripts was perfectly well known to them, and that I was the person supposed to have discovered them.

I scarcely need remark, that the circumstance of the dedicatory letter to Queen Elizabeth, with the having twice procured the same liquid preparation, would in themselves have been quite sufficient to overturn the whole Shakespearian mass, and display to the world the naked truth; in there search after which so much labour and criticism were expended.

A very short time previous to the commencement of the suppositious manuscripts, I found at an old broker’s shop a very spirited head of Oliver Cromwell, modelled in terra cota, which I was given to understand was the workmanship of a young man who had been bred up as a statuary, but had early fallen a victim to a putrid fever, which terminated his existence.

To the back of this relievo, which was about the size of two hands when open, I affixed a piece of paper; whereon I wrote, with some of the ink before described, a label, intimating that the head in question had belonged to Cromwell, and was a gift from himself to Bradshaw, whose signature I affixed to the superscription.

On producing this plaster head to Mr. S. Ireland, it was shown to several persons eminent for their knowledge in sculpture who pronounced it as their firm opinion that the head in question must have been modelled by Simon, the justly celebrated artist who lived during the protectorship.

 

 

One very extraordinary circumstance attending this transaction was, that the name of Bradshaw, which I had affixed at random to the label on the back of the bust, when compared with the autograph engraved from the original death-warrant of Charles the First, proved to be as similar as possible.

It need scarcely add that the relievo was deemed a very great curiosity; and coming, as was supposed, from such hands as Cromwell’s and Bradshaw’s, was naturally conjectured to be a very striking resemblance of the original.

Your rigid critics will undoubtedly be prompted to smile at the above statement, and ever after be led to deride the opinion of sculptors as to ancient performances. I certainly will so far coincide with that opinion as to assert, that, if the model had been produced as the performance of the young man who really modelled it, a slight commendation would have been passed upon his merits by those very persons who attributed it to Simon, and there the matter would have terminated.

Now let me submit a simple proposition. The workmanship was produced as from the hands of Simon. Either it possessed merit, or it did not. If it did possess merit sufficient to entitle it to the name of that sculptor, the young artist was certainly a rising genius as a modeller: if it did not possess sufficient spirit, it was the name of Simon being annexed which made it pass current.

I am myself no modeller; but, as far as nature goes, I can certainly form a judgement as to the execution of a relievo; and, in my humble opinion, the hand of Simon could not have executed a more masterly and spirited head than that before mentioned of the protector Cromwell.

On Mr. S. Ireland’s return from his tour down the Warwickshire Avon, the circumstances before related had taken such root in my mind, that I was more partial than ever to the pursuit after antiquities of every description, and more particularly to everything that bore the smallest affinity to our bard.

Mr. S. Ireland’s predilection for the name of Shakespeare seemed also to have increased by this visit to the birth-place of our mighty dramatist: his encomiums were unceasing; and he would frequently assert, that such was his veneration for the bard that he would willingly give half his library to become possessed even of his signature alone.

These conversations, so frequently repeated, led me to search all the old deeds at the gentleman’s chambers where I was articled, in order to see whether chance might not throw some instrument in my way bearing the autograph of Shakespeare.

This step proved abortive; in consequence of which I frequented the stalls of several venders of old paper and parchment, but all to no effect; till, wearied at length, I relaxed in my pursuit, and for a short period thought no more of the business.

I cannot recollect upon what particular occasion, but I rather think I had been occupied in the perusal of the mortgage-deed formerly in the possession of David Garrick, esq., which is to be found printed in Johnson and Steevens’ Shakespeare, when the idea first struck me of imitating the signature of our bard, in order to gratify Mr. Ireland.

In consequence of this, I made a tracing of the facsimiles of Shakespeare’s signature, both to his will in the Commons and the deed before mentioned, which are to be found in the aforesaid edition of Shakespeare’s works. I also hastily noted down the heads of this deed; and thus fortified I repaired to chambers, in order to produce the instrument which speedily followed.

Having cut off a piece of parchment from the end of an old rent-roll at chambers, I placed a deed before me of the period of James the First, and then proceeded to imitate the style of the penmanship as well as possible, forming a lease as between William Shakespeare and John Heminge with one Michael Fraser and Elizabeth his wife, whereto I affixed the signature of Shakespeare, keeping the transcript of his original autographs before me; while the superscription of Michael Fraser was executed with my left hand, in order the better to conceal it as being from the same pen.

The contents of the lease being finished, and the signatures subscribed, I found much difficulty in annexing the seals, which, at the period of James the First, were not similar to those of the present day, being formed of malleable wax, and stamped upon narrow pieces of parchment hanging from the deed directly under the signatures.

Having affixed the strips of parchment according to the method adopted in the reign of James, I., in the first instance endeavoured to heat in a shovel the wax of some old seals which I had cut from deeds; but this proved impracticable, as the wax, from age, having lost its moisture in a great degree, instead of melting rather crumbled over the heat.

At length I adopted the expedient of heating a knife, with which I cut an old seal in two without its cracking; and having with a penknife carefully scooped a cavity on the opposite side to that bearing the impression, I therein placed the strip of parchment pendent from the deed; and having heated some wax of a less ancient date, I placed it when hot within the remaining part of the cavity, and thus formed a back to the seal; but as the fore and hind part of the seal, on account of the different ages of the wax, varied in colour, I again moistened the seal before the fire, and in that state rubbed soot and coal-ashes over it, which thereby became incorporated with the seal, and in a great measure screened the colour from observation.

Having with much labour and contrivance accomplished the two seals, I determined on presenting this first specimen to Mr. S. Ireland.

I should not omit stating the reason why a deed was produced in preference to any loose paper which I might have formed without so much pains. The fact is, that I had no idea whatsoever of imitating the hand-writing of Shakespeare further than the autograph in question; neither had I then the vanity of attempting any imposition in imitation of his style.

In addition to these circumstances, a law instrument was assuredly the most calculated to stamp validity on the signature produced.

It was about eight o’clock, being after my evening’s attendance at chambers, that I presented the deed in question. Mr. S. Ireland’s family were present; and, if I mistake not, another person; the fact being precisely as follows: I had placed the deed within my bosom; when, after informing Mr. Ireland that I had a very great curiosity to show him, I drew it forth and presented it, saying “There, Sir! What do you think of that?”

Mr. Ireland, opening the parchment, regarded it for a length of time with the strictest scrutiny: he then examined the seals; and afterwards proceeded to fold up the instrument; and on presenting it to me he replied, “I certainly believe it to be a genuine deed of the time.”

Returning it immediately into Mr. Ireland’s hand, I then made answer: “If you think it so I beg your acceptance of it.” Mr. Ireland, immediately taking the keys of his library from his pocket, presented them to me, saying: “It is impossible for me to express the pleasure you have given me by the presentation of this deed: there are the keys of my book-case; go and take from it whatsoever you please; I shall refuse you nothing.” 4

I instantly returned the keys into Mr. Ireland’s hand, saying, “I thank you, sir; but I shall accept of nothing” Mr. Ireland, rising from his chair, selected from his books a scarce tract, with engraved plates, called Stokes the Vaulting Master, which he peremptorily insisted I should accept. And such was the precise manner of my presentation of the fictitious deed between Shakespeare and Fraser, that being the first document produced.

The morning after my presentation of the lease, the first person sent to by Mr. Samuel Ireland was sir Fr*d*r**k Ed*n, who, after a very strict examination of the deed, gave it as his decided opinion that the instrument was valid; and on looking at the impressions on the seals, that under the signature of Shakespeare he affirmed was a representation of a machine called the Quintin; for an account of which Stow the historian was referred to; who states that the Quintin was used by the young men, in order to instruct them in the art of tilting on horseback with the lance; the machine being constructed as follows: An upright beam was firmly fixed in the earth, at the top of which was a bar placed horizontally, moving on a pivot. To a hook at one end of the bar was hanging a large iron ring; while from the other extremity was suspended a large bag filled with sand. The object of the tilter was to unhook the ring, and bear it off upon the point of his lance when at full gallop, which if he failed to accomplish with dexterity, the bar moving swiftly on the pivot swang round the bag, which, coming in contact with the rider’s back, was almost certain of unhorsing him.

As this amusement seemed to bear so great an analogy to the name Shakespeare, it was immediately conjectured that the seal must have belonged to our bard; and from that moment the Quintin was gravely affirmed to be the seal always used by our monarch of the drama.

I shall merely state, that, on cutting the seal in question from an old deed at chambers, I never even looked at the impression; and, if such had been the case, I should not have known that the stamp on the wax represented the Quintin: a machine of which I had never heard until after the delivery of the deed as before stated.

Upon the full discovery of every circumstance being made to Albany Wallis, esq., and my informing him, that, with the alteration of the names only, I had nearly worded my lease from the mortgage-deed formerly in the possession of David Garrick, esq. (which has, been so frequently printed, and the words I had taken down, as before stated), Mr. Wallis in consequence referred to a copy of that deed; and, on comparing it with Mr. Ireland’s publication of the Miscellaneous Papers, wherein the spurious deed of Shakespeare and Fraser is printed, he was astonished on finding the similarity that existed between them; and expressed his wonder, that, out of so many persons conversant with every thing relating to Shakespeare, and who had examined the papers, no one should have remarked the obvious plagiary throughout the deed in question.

Numerous persons flocked to Mr. Ireland’s house in order to inspect the deed, who all coincided with sir F. Ed*n in believing the instrument valid; and, after the lapse of some few days, it was hinted, that in all probability many papers of Shakespeare’s might be found by referring to the same source from whence the deed had been drawn. This suggestion was frequently uttered in my presence: and being thus urged forward to produce what really was not in existence, I then determined on essaying some composition in imitation of the language of Shakespeare.

I must, however, solemnly affirm that had not such incitements been used, I never should have attempted a second document, my real object having been to give Mr. S. Ireland satisfaction: that wish accomplished, my purpose was fully answered.

Having frequently heard of the bigoted profession of faith found at the birthplace of Shakespeare, and said to have been written by John Shakespeare, our poet’s father, wherein the effusions of the most determined catholic are expressed, I had recourse to the plan of writing a profession of faith for our bard, which I executed accordingly.

The sheet of paper on which the profession of faith was written was the outside of several others, on some of which accounts had been kept in the reign of Charles the First; and being at that time wholly unacquainted with the water-marks used in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, I., carefully selected two half sheets not having any mark whatsoever, on which I penned my first effusion; keeping the facsimiles of Shakespeare’s original autographs before me.

Having the most rooted antipathy to everything like superstition and bigotry, and having heard it very frequently surmised that our great poet, like his father, was no protestant, but of the catholic persuasion (particularly on account of the language made use of by the Ghost in Hamlet as to purgatory, &c), I determined, if possible, to decide the point on the other hand, by making the profession of faith appear to be written by a sincere votary of the protestant religion.

As many encomiums were passed upon the following composition, I have thought it necessary to state, that the effusion was altogether unstudied, being committed to paper, in the disguised hand and redundancy of letters in the spelling, just as the thoughts arose in my own mind, without any previous transcript or subsequent alteration whatsoever.

The word leffee, which appears in this article, and which was so much the subject of cavil, was intended to be leafless; and to the perturbation of the moment only is to be attributed that literal error, which was afterwards swelled into a flagrant proof of the invalidity of the composition as coming from the pen of Shakespeare.

In penning this profession of faith I formed the twelve different letters contained in the Christian and sir names of Wm. Shakespeare as much as possible to resemble the tracings of his original autographs; and I was also particular in introducing as many capital doableyous and esses as possible.

The other letters were ideal, and written to correspond as nearly as might be with the general style of the twelve letters used in Shakespeare’s names as written by himself.

As the penmanship of the profession of faith was my first essay beyond a simple autograph, it was written with some caution: but had any person minutely compared the style of writing therein produced with those manuscripts which were penned after I had acquired a facility in committing to paper the disguised hand, he must instantly have discovered the difference; which was, indeed, so obvious, that the hand producing the profession of faith would scarcely be thought, upon examination, to have been the same that committed to paper the great bulk of the manuscripts.

The opinions delivered as to the language of the profession of faith were unanimous: every person allowing the genuine feeling that breathed throughout the whole composition; which, it was stated, fully evinced it to be from the pen of our great dramatist: nor was my satisfaction a little heightened on finding that this effusion banished at once every idea of Shakespeare’s Catholicism from the minds of those whom I had frequently heard hazarding that opinion as to his religious tenets. Thus bad begins, and worse remains behind.

After the production of the profession of faith, I was much questioned as to the source from whence the manuscripts were drawn; and it was then for the first time I began to discover the unpleasant predicament in which I had involved myself by the production of the papers; for to screen a falsehood it was absolutely necessary to have recourse to a second duplicity: in consequence of which the following story was framed, which was invariably told to every individual who requested satisfaction on that head.

I informed the public, that, having made an acquaintance at a coffeehouse with a gentleman of fortune, who was from my conversation given to understand that I had a great predilection for everything like antiquity, he had in consequence requested that I would pay him a visit; stating at the same time that he had many old papers, which had descended to him from his ancestors, who had practised the law, among which some might in all probability be found worthy my notice, in which case he would willingly make me a present of them.

I further added that a morning was appointed for my waiting upon him, but that, conceiving he might have only stated the above in order to turn me into ridicule, I did not pay any attention to the day specified; but happening, some mornings after, to pass near his chambers, the circumstance came to my recollection, and I in consequence determined on paying my friend a visit.

I then observed, that on my entrance into the apartment the gentleman appeared rather hurt at my remissness in not having kept my appointment with him; when, after a suitable apology, he desired me to go into an adjoining apartment, where I observed a vast collection of old deeds and papers tied up in bundles and numbered, which I instantly began to inspect, when, after having looked over some parcels, I discovered, to my utter astonishment, the deed between our bard and Michael Fraser, bearing the signature of Shakespeare.

I then proceeded to state that, my first surprise having subsided, I took the above-mentioned deed to my friend, who also appeared much astonished, not conceiving any such document had been in his possession; that he remarked it was certainly a very curious instrument, but that having promised me everything I should find worthy my notice, he would not be worse than his word, and, desiring only that I would make him a fair transcript in my own hand-writing, he told me the deed was at my service.

Such was the manner in which I accounted for my having become possessed of the manuscripts, till further questioning produced the following additional tale.

As the manuscripts became rather voluminous, great stress was laid upon their value, and it was thought a matter of astonishment how any man in his proper senses could think of giving away such a treasure. In order to reconcile inquirers to this objection, I stated that during my research among the deeds of my friend I had discovered one which established his right to certain property that had long been a subject of litigation; on which account he conceived the giving me the Shakespearian manuscripts no other than a just recompense for the service I had thus Tendered him.

As every individual inspecting the papers remarked that it would have been his pride to be known as the original possessor of the documents produced, I was in consequence questioned as to the name of the donor: my reply to which was to the following effect: that the gentleman being possessed of a large fortune, and being well aware of the inquiries which must take place on the production of the papers, did not think fit to subject himself to the impertinent questionings of every individual who conceived himself licensed to demand an explanation concerning them; that he in consequence gave me the documents as mere curiosities, exacting from me at the same time a most solemn asseveration that I would keep his name for ever concealed.

And such was the method adopted to preclude every future inquiry as to the name and residence of the supposed original donor of the manuscripts.

Of the persons who visited Mr. Samuel Ireland when the manuscripts were not very voluminous, the above gentlemen were among the most conspicuous. On their arrival, Mr. Ireland was alone in his study to receive them; but, by the desire of the visitants, I was shortly after summoned before them, to answer interrogatories.

I confess I had never before felt so much terror, and would almost have bartered my life to have evaded the meeting: there was, however, no alternative, and I was under the necessity of appearing before them. Having replied to their several questionings as to the discovery of the manuscripts and the secretion of the gentleman’s name, one of these two inspectors of the manuscripts addressed me, saying, “Well, young man; the public will have just cause to admire you for the research you have made, which will afford so much gratification to the literary world.” To this panegyric I bowed my head, and remained silent.

While Mr. Ireland read aloud the profession of faith, Drs. P*rr and Wh*i:t*u remained silent, paying infinite attention to every syllable that was pronounced; while I continued immovable, awaiting to hear their dreaded opinion. This effusion being ended, one of the above gentlemen (who, as far as my recollection can recall the circumstance, I believe to have been Dr. P*rr) thus addressed himself to Mr. Ireland: “Sir, we have very fine passages in our church service, and our litany abounds with beauties but here, sir, here is a man who has distanced us all!”

When I heard these words pronounced I could scarcely credit my own senses; and such was the effect they produced upon me, that I knew not whether to smile or not. I was, however, very forcibly struck with the encomium; and shortly after left the study, ruminating on the praise which had been unconsciously lavished, by a person so avowedly erudite, on the unstudied production of one so green in years as myself.

On entering the back dining-room, which was contiguous to Mr. Ireland’s study, I reclined my head against the window frame, still ruminating on the words I had heard; when vanity first took possession of my mind, to which every other consideration yielded: fired with the idea of possessing genius to which I had never aspired, and full of the conviction that my style had so far imitated Shakespeare’s as to deceive two persons of such allowed classical learning as Drs. P*rr and Wh*rt*n, I paid little attention to the sober dictates of reason, and thus implicitly yielded myself to the gilded snare which afterwards proved to me the source of indescribable pain and unhappiness.

Being thus urged forward to the production of more manuscripts, it became necessary that I should possess a sufficient quantity of old paper to enable me to proceed: in consequence of which I applied to a bookseller named Verey, in Great May’s Buildings, St. Martin’s Lane, who, for the sum of five shillings, suffered me to take from all the folio and quarto volumes in his shop the fly-leaves which they contained.

By this means I was amply stored with that commodity: nor did I fear any mention of the circumstance by Mr. Verey, whose quiet unsuspecting disposition I was well convinced would never lead him to make the transaction public: in addition to which, he was not likely even to know anything concerning the supposed Shakespearian discovery by myself; and even if he had, I do not imagine that my purchase of the old paper in question would have excited in him the smallest degree of suspicion.

As I was fully aware, from the variety of water-marks which are in existence at the present day, that they must have constantly been altered since the period of Elizabeth, and being for some time wholly unacquainted with the water-marks of that age, I very carefully produced my first specimens of the writing on such sheets of old paper as had no mark whatsoever.

Having heard it frequently stated that the appearance of such marks on the papers would have greatly tended to establish their validity, I listened attentively to every remark which was made upon the subject, and from thence I at length gleaned the intelligence that a jug was the prevalent water-mark of the reign of Elizabeth: in consequence of which I inspected all the sheets of old paper then in my possession; and having selected such as had the jug upon them, I produced the succeeding manuscripts upon these; being careful, however, to mingle with them a certain number of blank leaves, that the production on a sudden of so many water-marks might not excite suspicion in the breasts of those persons who were most conversant with the manuscripts.

Previous to the execution of the letter as from Shakespeare to Cowley the player, I had delineated the curious sketch of his head, with its appurtenances, which I produced it to my father, who seemed inclined to turn it into ridicule as an inexplicable paper and of no consequence.

Finding such to be the case, I had recourse to the expedient of writing a letter as from Shakespeare to master Cowley the player, which I pretended to have found during my research of the ensuing day, and which epistle instantly reflected a degree of consequence on the witty conundrum in question.

As it was supposed that nothing could possibly come from the hand of Shakespeare which did not possess some sterling good, the witty conundrum became an object of learned investigation; but all to no effect: for although many sapient opinions were hazarded as to its real meaning, nothing conclusive was decided upon: which is, indeed, not at all to be wondered at, as when it was by me committed to paper I had no particular end in view, neither was there any meaning whatsoever annexed to the drawing of the supposed witty conundrum.

By the very familiar style I adopted in the letter from our bard to Richard Cowley, supposed to have enclosed the witty conundrum, it was by all inspectors of the manuscripts asserted that Shakespeare must have been a kind good-natured character, and of a very playful disposition: nor can I omit making mention of the superscription to this epistle, which frequently excited risibility.

 

 

During the frequent conversations that took place after the production of the first documents, I heard peculiar stress laid by the honourable Mr. B***g on a letter supposed to have been written by James the First to Shakespeare, and which it was stated might be found among the papers; but as so many conversations were held upon that subject, I thought the production of such a letter would be too obvious: in addition to which, I was totally unacquainted with the writing and autograph of that monarch.

I therefore determined on fabricating a letter from Queen Elizabeth to our bard: in the execution of which I was greatly facilitated by an original autograph of that princess in Mr. S. Ireland’s possession, which I could always procure without his knowledge, and from which I made a hasty tracing when alone. From the same facsimile I also formed the letters throughout my spurious epistle from that Queen to Shakespeare.

My principal object in the production of this letter was to make our bard appear of so much consequence in his own time as to be personally noticed by so great and politic a princess as our Elizabeth.

As to the verses alluded to in my gracious epistle, they certainly never had existence, to the best of my knowledge: at any rate I may safely assert they could not have been one half so despicable as the wretched attempts at the versification so facetiously introduced in Mr. Malone’s Inquiry.

However, for the sake of proving how far commentatorship is of utility, I refer the public to pages 101 and 102 of Mr. Malone’s Inquiry, which are literally filled with notes upon twenty-two lines of Grubstreet poetry, of which the above couplet [beginning of chapter] is a part.

These lines are meant to convey sarcasm; in which the writer has as well succeeded as in his attempt at poetry.

It is a very curious fact, that the female who attended at the chambers where I was articled was present during the whole of my fabrication of Elizabeth’s supposed letter; which, when completed, I gave into her hands, and requested to know whether she would not have conceived it very old; to which she replied in the affirmative; adding, with a laugh, that it was very odd I could do such unaccountable strange things.

Had this circumstance been generally known, it would unquestionably have led to the development of the whole Shakespearian forgery. Indeed, the same effect might have been produced by the disclosure of my fabrication of the dedicatory letter to the religious tract in the time of Elizabeth; or of my procurement of ink from the bookbinder’s man: not to mention the quantity of old paper purchased by me: all which were facts known to individuals who would have come forward had not their pursuits been so diametrically opposite to everything like literature and a Shakespearian controversy.

To the same gentleman who gave me the first idea of writing a letter as from Queen Elizabeth to our bard, by his frequent mention of the letter said to have been written by James (her successor) to Shakespeare, I am also indebted for the idea of writing a letter to Lord Southampton, with its answer, which originated in that gentleman’s so frequently laying a stress on the supposed bounty of that nobleman to our bard, and the light which would be thrown on the fact should any document be discovered denoting the sum so given by his Lordship. Profiting by this information, I took a fit opportunity, and then produced.

On writing this letter, as in the case of the profession of faith, I kept the tracings from Shakespeare’s original autographs before me, and so penned the epistle, without making any studied transcript, but merely committing my thoughts to paper in the disguised hand as they occurred to my mind.

As I was, however, fearful that some document might afterwards be discovered tending to prove the exact sum sent by Lord Southampton to Shakespeare, I thought it most expedient not to make mention of any specific donation, and therefore said, in the letter in question, “Doe note esteeme me a sluggarde nor tardye for thus havynge delayed to answere or rather toe thattk you for youre greate Bountye.”

Having completed the letter in question, I was on the point of folding it up, and directing it to Lord Southampton, when suddenly the following idea struck me.

As this letter of thanks was supposed to be sent by Shakespeare to Lord Southampton, how could it possibly revert back into the possession of our bard?

After some cogitation, I had recourse to the expedient of writing at the top of the letter “Copye of mye Letter toe hys Grace offe Southampton” to which transcript (supposed to have been kept by William Shakespeare) from the epistle believed to have been sent to his Lordship, I affixed Lord Southampton’s spurious answer.

As I had not the smallest conception that any correspondence or autographs of Lord Southampton were in existence, and being indeed at that time totally unaware of the immense collections of ancient papers that are extant throughout the kingdom, I conceived that I might with impunity give the letter in question in any style of writing I thought fit, and therefore penned his Lordship’s gracious communication with my left hand, that no similitude might appear between it and the copy of Shakespeare’s epistle accompanying it.

The mode of writing adopted by me in his Lordship’s letter will not, however, upon examination, be found so very dissimilar to the signature of Fraser on the spurious lease written with the same hand. Every person viewing the manuscripts was surprised at his Lordship’s miserable penmanship: and indeed, when compared with the facsimile of his original autograph given by Mr. Malone in his Inquiry, nothing can be more opposite, as Lord Southampton in reality did write a very neat intelligible hand.

The letters in question were deemed highly curious and valuable, and the style of Shakespeare’s was applauded beyond measure: but it was on all hands lamented that the exact sum so beneficently given by his Lordship to Shakespeare was not therein specified, as in that case all doubts upon the subject would have been ended.

As our great dramatist was married very early in life to one Anne Hathaway of the village of Shotery (at no great distance from Stratford-on-Avon), I became desirous of introducing to the world one of his love effusions of that early period: on which account was penned his epistle to that lady, including five stanzas of poetry and a braid of hair supposed to have been sent to her as a token of his unalterable affection.

As the engraving of Shakespeare prefixed to the folio edition of his plays, and executed by Droeshout, represents our bard as having short, straight, and wiry hair, I selected a lock of a similar kind, then in my possession (which in my boyish days had been given me as a gage d’amour), conceiving it very appropriate to my purpose.

Having purchased of one Yardley, a vender of old parchments in Clare Market, some patents of the reigns of Henry VIII., Mary, and Elizabeth, with the great seals of England pendent thereto (being affixed to the parchment with thick woven silks was usually the custom at those periods, and being about four inches in length), the idea struck me that the use of one of the pieces of woven silk in question would give an imposing air of genuineness to the lock of hair. After putting this expedient into effect I wrote the letter to Anne Hathaway, wherein I laid great stress on the workmanship of the silk, as if executed by the hand of Shakespeare.

I must confess that when I call to my recollection the numerous persons who inspected the papers, and of course the lock of hair with its silken appendage, and who were in the daily habit of inspecting grants, charters, patents, &c, most of them having a similar twist in order to affix the great seal to the parchments, I am much astonished that the silk in question should have never been remarked by any one frequenting Mr. Ireland’s house.

Small quantities of the hair being carefully taken from the original lock, were distributed into several rings; but I shall refrain from making mention of their wearers: it is sufficient for me that they were believers in the authenticity of the manuscripts.

A short time after the letter and the lock of hair had appeared, it was by some persons most ridiculously asserted that human hair could not have resisted the lapse of time from Shakespeare’s days to the present aera; and in order to ridicule the affair, it was stated that one Mr. Collet, a hair merchant, was to come in all the pomp of his trade and scrutinise the Shaksperian curl.

However, to terminate the dispute in question, it is well known that human hair has been discovered in abundance on the heads of embalmed bodies which have remained centuries in the earth; and in many instances it has even been found to grow after death: one proof of this is to be adduced, which was witnessed by many persons still living; for when the vault of Edward IV., who died in the year 1483, was discovered by chance in the chapel at Windsor, the hair of the head and the beard were found flowing, and as strong as hair cut from the head of a living person.

I myself saw a piece of the hair taken from the beard of that monarch, which was very strong, and of a reddish colour.

One of the earliest documents produced to strengthen the validity of the fabricated mass, was a promissory note of hand appearing to have been given to John Heminges by William Shakespeare as a compensation for business done at the Globe theatre, and for his great trouble in going down for him to Stratford-on-Avon.

The note of hand was payable at one month, and was for the sum of five pounds and five shillings English money.

To this curious note I affixed a receipt with some wax, as from John Heminges, specifying the payment of the money on the very day the month expired; from which it was generally conjectured that Shakespeare, in addition to his other good qualities, was very punctual in all pecuniary transactions.

This document was signed with my left hand; and, however trivial it may be esteemed, proved in the end of infinite consequence, as will appear from the ensuing statements.

When the manuscripts became voluminous and had excited general attention, having one day returned to Mr. Samuel Ireland’s house at three o'clock (the period of my leaving chambers), I was, to my no small astonishment, informed as follows: That Mr. Albany Wallis had been with Mr. Ireland about half an hour before, and had stated, with a smile, that he came to overturn at once all the Shakespearian discovery: that he (Mr.Wallis) then produced a deed signed by John Heminges, in a hand altogether different from that of the signature affixed to my receipt; which signature, as before stated, had been committed to paper with my left hand, for at the period when it was fabricated I did not conjecture that any document bearing the autograph of John Heminges would ever appear to invalidate the suppositious one annexed by me to the receipt.

On learning this circumstance, I was terror-struck, and immediately requested Mr. Ireland to accompany me down to Mr. Wallis’, in order that I might inspect the instrument in question, which had been, discovered among the numerous law documents in Mr. Wallis’ possession; to whom the public is also indebted for the mortgage-deed bearing the autograph of Shakespeare, which was discovered among the papers of the Featherstonehaugh family, and presented to the late David Garrick, esquire, who bequeathed it to the British Museum.

On our arrival at Mr. Albany Wallis’ he instantly produced the document so recently discovered, which he kept in his own hand, showing the signature of John Heminges to myself and Mr. Samuel Ireland.

From the appearance of the instrument I was fully assured that there could not be a doubt as to its authenticity; and from the style of the hand-writing I also knew that the meanest capacity would have at once decided that the autograph affixed to the deed was not from the same hand as had subscribed that which was to the receipt, so totally different was the penmanship in every respect.

Having examined the autograph with infinite attention, I quitted Mr. Ireland and Mr.Wallis, stating that I would see the supposed gentleman during the morning, and acquaint him with the whole event.

From Norfolk Street I instantly repaired to chambers, retaining in my recollection the form of the original autograph of John Heminges which I had just inspected; and on my arrival there I committed the signature to paper in a form as similar to the original as my memory would enable me to give to it.

After which I penned a receipt with the Shakespearian ink, and upon old paper, as for theatrical disbursements, forming the letters as similarly as possible to those in the name I had thus noted from recollection. With this document I hurried back to Mr. Albany Wallis, to whom I produced it with the following statement.

Mr. A. Wallis, having compared the signature to my receipt, thus hastily formed, with the original autograph subscribed to the deed, was immediately struck with the similarity; when I gave the following relation: that on quitting him I had immediately hastened to the supposed gentleman, whom I very luckily found at home: that I expressed to him my astonishment at the discovery which had been made by Mr. Wallis, of a deed signed by John Heminges in a hand not resembling in the least the signature subscribed to the receipt; that upon witnessing my embarrassment he smiled, and, opening the drawer of his writing-table, drew from thence this second receipt, which was found correspondent to the signature on the deed, saying, “Take that to Mr.Wallis’, and see if it does not correspond with the hand-writing to his deed.”

That my friend then further informed me, that, although not known to the world, there were two John Heminges in the time of Shakespeare; the one connected with Shakespeare and the Globe theatre, and the other being concerned for the Curtain theatre, which was another playhouse of the period of James I. That the signatures of John Heminges to Mr. Wallis’ deed and to the second receipt thus given me by the gentleman, were the autographs of Shakespeare’s friend; while the name affixed to the first receipt, which bore no resemblance to that on the deed, was the signature of John Heminges of the Curtain theatre, who was in some measure connected with Shakespeare and the Globe theatre.

I also further added, that the gentleman acquainted me that it would appear, from further documents to be produced, that these two John Heminges were distinguished by the appellations of the tall John Heminges of the Globe and the short John Heminges of the Curtain theatres.

However apt I might have been in carrying this signature in my recollection, and thus speedily producing a document at chambers to resemble the signature on Mr. Wallis’ deed, I nevertheless, upon this further examination of the original autograph to the deed, did imagine that I could execute a fresh receipt that would more strikingly resemble the genuine signature of John Heminges.

In consequence of which, having fully satisfied Mr.Wallis’ mind at this trying juncture, I again hastened back to chambers; where I once more penned the receipt verbatim which I had so lately written: and bearing the recollection of the original signature more strongly in my mind, this duplicate fabrication proved a very strong resemblance to the authentic autograph on the deed: of course the first, which I had taken to Mr. Wallis, was destroyed, and the second, thus executed, was substituted in its stead: such being the method adopted in order to reconcile the difference between the name written with my left hand and that which appeared on the deed newly discovered by Mr. Albany Wallis of Norfolk Street.

It is a circumstance perhaps not unworthy remark, that the whole period of time taken up in first seeing the deed at Mr. Wallis’, hastening to chambers in order to form the receipt, returning back to Mr. Wallis’ with the receipt so fabricated and there framing and telling the story of the tall and short John Heminges, and finally the second return to chambers and re-execution (if I may be allowed the expression) of the receipt, did not actually occupy more than the space of one hour and a quarter.

It will here be necessary to note, that Mr. Wallis’ dwelling was at the bottom of Norfolk Street in the Strand, and the chambers to which I went were in New Inn. This remarkable expedition was afterwards alleged as a convincing proof that the documents could not be other than original, as it was affirmed to be out of all human probability that such a succession of events could have taken place in so limited a space of time.

After the production of this first receipt, to resemble the autograph affixed to Mr. Wallis’ deed, I within a few days executed several others, and annexed a similar signature to some of the books which I produced, as a further proof that the documents were genuine.

In order, however, to give some idea of the opinions excited by this transaction, the following head, taken from Mr. Chalmers’ Apology for the Believers (being a note in pages 18 and 19), will at once display his thoughts upon the subject:

 

“I was present when the genuine deed of John Heminges, which is printed by Mr. Malone in the Inquiry (page 409), was produced in evidence; when there was produced at the same time a black-letter pamphlet having the name “John Heminges” written at the top of the title-page, so like as to be a perfect facsimile; and at the bottom of the same page was written the name “Wm. Shakespeare” on the back of the title-page was written “This was the book of John Heminges, which he gave unto me, Wm. Shakespeare.” Now had there been an issue, on an action at law, whether these were the signatures of Heminges and of Shakespeare, the genuine deed of Heminges would have been given in evidence, as the certainty from, which the uncertainty would have been inferred. Here is legal or admissible proof: and the jury who had been sworn to try that issue according to the evidence given them must have delivered their verdict for the genuineness of the signatures of Heminges and Shakespeare on the black-letter pamphlet before mentioned. This example proves how difficult it is to detect some forgeries by fair discussion. First, I believe that the deed of Heminges is genuine: Secondly, I believe that the signature of Heminges, on the black-letter pamphlet, was copied by the pen of a forger from the real signature on the deed; and that the signature of Shakespeare was copied by the same pen from fancy in some measure: yet am I of opinion that these forgeries cannot be detected by fair discussion.”

As the circumstances attending Mr. James Boswell’s inspection of the manuscripts have been variously represented, and as I was present on that occasion, I shall state the facts as they really occurred.

On the arrival of Mr. Boswell, the papers were as usual placed before him: when he commenced his examination of them; and being satisfied as to their antiquity, as far as the external appearance would attest, he proceeded to examine the style of the language from the fair transcripts made from the disguised hand-writing. In this research Mr. Boswell continued for a considerable length of time, constantly speaking in favour of the internal as well as external proofs of the validity of the manuscripts.

At length, finding himself rather thirsty, he requested a tumbler of warm brandy and water; which having nearly finished, he then redoubled his praises of the manuscripts; and at length, arising from his chair, he made use of the following expression: “Well; I shall now die contented, since I have lived to witness the present day.”

Mr. Boswell then, kneeling down before the volume containing a portion of the papers, continued, “I now kiss the invaluable relics of our bard: and thanks to God that I have lived to see them.” Having kissed the volume with every token of reverence, Mr. Boswell shortly after quitted Mr. Ireland’s house: and although I believe he revisited the papers on some future occasions, yet that was the only time I was honoured with a sight of Mr. James Boswell.

As old papers containing trivial accounts are usually bound together, it was deemed extraordinary that the numerous playhouse receipts, which were written on small slips of paper, should be brought forward without being tied up. I was for some time anxious to obviate this objection, yet dreaded a discovery, by producing a thread or string of the present day, the texture and weaving of which I conceived might betray me: in consequence of this a considerable period elapsed ere I was able to compass my point, which was at length effected in the following manner: As Mr. S. Ireland very frequently made it a point to go to the house of Lords in order to hear his Majesty’s speech and be present when he was robed, I happened to be in company with him on one of those occasions when, having to pass through some adjoining apartments, where many persons were waiting, and wherein we were also detained for a short time, I observed that the walls of the chambers were hung with very old and mutilated tapestry; when the idea suddenly struck me, that, by procuring a small remnant (knowing its antiquity), I might unravel the worsted and turn it to my immediate purposes.

In consequence of this conjecture, I took up a loose piece (being about half the size of my hand) which was worn by time from the hangings of an apartment; and on returning to my Shakespearian occupation I drew out the worsted thread, which afterwards served me whensoever I had occasion to attach any of the receipts or other papers together.

The remains of the small piece of tapestry in question were vested in the hands of Albany Wallis, Esq., on my disclosure of every fact appertaining to the suppositious papers.

As I heard it unceasingly stated that “the more bulky the papers were, the more probable would their authenticity appear,” I began to consider what would be the best expedient to accomplish this end without much labour of the brain; for as my muse was not so very prolific as to “spin and weave” poetry as fast as it was required, I really began to loath the very idea of the manuscripts, which became to me an insufferable burden.

At length the idea of playhouse receipts, or memorandums of theatrical expenditures, struck my fancy: in consequence of which, when my brain was not actually accordant with the temper of the Heliconian Nine, I had recourse to the drudgery of memorandum writing: by which means I added to the mass of the papers, and at the same time calmed the voice of reproof which was so constantly lavished upon me for not producing that which was not to be produced because I was not in the humour to compose it.

These documents were written on small slips of paper and strung together by the dozen; being fastened with pieces of worsted unravelled from the tapestry.

The memorandum deemed the most curious I shall here notice: it was worded as under: “In the Yeare o Chryste Forre oure Trouble inne goynge toe playe before the Lorde Leycesterre at house ande oure greate expenneces thereuponne 19 Poundes Receyvedde ofs Grace the Summe o 50 Poundes. Wm Shakspeare.”

From this receipt, it was inferred that Shakespeare’s company of players must have ranked foremost in that day it having been selected, in preference to any other, by so renowned a favourite of Queen Elizabeth as the lord Leicester.

It should be recollected that there were a variety of playhouses open at that time in the city of London. In addition to which, the sum of fifty pounds was deemed a very exorbitant payment for that period. 5

I here think it necessary to refer my readers to the head-line of the receipt above quoted. The blank after the word “Chryste” was originally filled up with a date; but so careless was I at that period as positively to have neglected making any reference to the period when Lord Leicester died: in consequence of which the date originally standing there was two years subsequent to the demise of that nobleman.

Having acquired this knowledge, I did not think it requisite to destroy the memorandum altogether, but satisfied myself with tearing off the corner of the receipt bearing the numerical thus leaving it as a torn document, and making a blank where the erroneous date had originally stood which must, if known, have at once stamped the signet of invalidity on all the papers produced.

Upon a second memorandum relative to the playing before Lord Leicester, I noted down a payment of two shillings extra, made by William Shakespeare “toe masterre Lowinne” for his “goode servyces ande welle playnge.” And as upon many other of the playhouse receipts the names of the performers of that period were mentioned, the following head will account for my knowledge of them.

Although the first and second editions in folio of Shakespeare’s plays were in my possession, I had totally forgotten that on one of the first leaves of those editions are printed the names of the several performers in his dramas; and it was on this account that I remained for a Considerable time without producing any manuscripts relative to the players of that period.

At length I accidentally heard the fact mentioned by some person inspecting the manuscripts, and in consequence referred immediately to the folios in question, whence I procured the information required, and which, without my knowledge, had been for so long a period within the scope of my attainment.

As it was generally allowed that law documents were the most convincing evidences of the validity of the manuscripts, the idea entered my mind of producing agreements as entered into between some of the players and William Shakespeare.

In consequence of which I formed a deed as between Lowine and our bard, wherein the former agreed to perform during four years at the weekly salary of one pound and ten shillings: which payment was very exorbitant for that period; but as I had heard it surmised that Lowine was the chief performer of his age, I consequently was not sparing in my allowance to him.

By this document Henry Condell the player covenanted to perform for the further space of three years, at the weekly salary of one pound and one shilling, to be paid every Saturday before twelve o’clock at night whether sick or well; it being covenanted “that he would play upon the stage for the said Wm. Shakspeare alle comedys ande tragedyes whiche he the said Wm. Shakspeare may at any tyme during the said terme cause to be played not written or composed by hymselfe butte are the writings or composytyons of others.”

These surreptitious agreements, purporting to be made between Shakespeare and Lowine and Shakespeare and Condell, were written on parchment, in the same manner as the first document purporting to be between Shakespeare and Fraser, with this difference, that the latter two agreements were much better executed than was the first fabricated deed.

With respect to the seals, I had also recourse to the same means of affixing them to the parchment slips appendent to the agreements as on the fabrication of the instrument between Shakespeare and Fraser.

As these documents were supposed to throw great light upon the theatrical affairs of that period, they were highly prized by the visitants at Mr. S. Ireland’s mansion: in addition to which, as legal instruments, bearing the seals on which so great a stress had been laid in the case of Fraser’s lease, they were deemed the most indisputable evidences of the originality of the whole mass of papers produced.

As one very curious circumstance occurred respecting one of the seals (but to which of the documents affixed has now totally escaped my recollection), I shall here give a relation of the event precisely as it occurred. I have, under a previous head stated that two kinds of wax were used in affixing the seals to the strips of parchment: that is to say, the front side, bearing the impression, was not melted; whereas the back part of the seal was formed of fresh melted wax.

Now it unfortunately happened that some person inspecting one of the deeds suffered the same to fall from his hands upon Mr. S. Ireland’s mahogany writing-desk: on which occasion, such was the brittle property of the wax, that the front side of one of the seals severed from the back part, which had held it to the strip of parchment appending from the deed by which any shrewd observer would have instantly recognised the difference in the colours of the wax.

However, this circumstance being communicated to me, I instantly advised the binding of the two parts together with black silk: and thus was the deed shown for a short time, without any scrutinising research being made of the mutilated parts of the seal; which might have been done by any person untwisting the silk that held the broken parts together.

As I dreaded lest some shrewd observer of the manuscripts should wish to examine with care this broken seal, I took an opportunity of informing Mr. S. Ireland that the supposed gentleman was desirous of inspecting that very document for an hour and as nothing was denied to the mysterious donor of the papers, the instrument in question was consequently committed to my charge; with which I speedily hastened to chambers; and, having heated some fresh wax, firmly riveted the broken parts together: after which, placing the black silk round the seal, I redelivered it to Mr. Ireland.

Thus had any after visitant at Mr. Ireland’s house been desirous of inspecting the broken seal, and had withdrawn the silk for that purpose, he would have found the parts adhering: in which case, whatsoever might have been the surprise, it would not have been tantamount to the conviction which must have flashed upon the mind of any shrewd observer on examining the parts of the seal disunited, which would at once have displayed the contrivance to which I had had recourse in affixing the seals to the deed.

As I one day chanced to pass through Butcher Row, I saw a curious old drawing hanging up for sale. It was framed, and placed between two glasses, in order to display the back and front of the paper on one side of which was the representation of an aged figure in the habit of a Dutchman, while on the reverse appeared a young man gaily attired in an English dress of the period of James the First.

As it suddenly struck me that the limning might be of utility to me in my Shakespearian employment, I made a purchase of it, and took it with me to chambers; where, taking out one of the glasses, I turned my purchase to the following account.

On the side bearing the representation of the old Dutchman I painted a pair of scales and a knife, in order that it might pass for the representation of Shylock in the Merchant of Venice; and on the reverse, whereon appeared the gaily dressed youth, I delineated, in one corner, the Arms of Shakespeare; on the shield of which I from thoughtlessness reversed the spear, making the point directed to the right-hand, whereas it really ought to have pointed to the left corner.

On the opposite side I introduced the initials W S, with the titles of a few of Shakespeare’s plays: and having before me a copy of Droeshout’s print, I altered the lineaments of the face of the figure represented, giving it as much as possible a resemblance to the print before me. Having made these alterations, I replaced the drawing in the frame, and, after fastening down the glass, presented it to Mr. Ireland.

The drawing of the old Dutchman was instantly construed to represent Shylock the Jew, although it was deemed rather extraordinary that the character should have been arrayed in the costume of a North-Hollander, which was really the case.

The figure on the reverse (having the Coat of Arms of Shakespeare, the initial letters of his name, with the titles of some of his dramas, and bearing the faint resemblance which the altered physiognomy held to the print of Droeshout) was soon conceived to represent our bard in the character of Bassanio in the Merchant of Venice: and so far did conjecture go on this head, that it was gravely stated the drawing had all probability graced the green-room of the Globe theatre.

In order to stamp the drawing as coeval with the time of Shakespeare, one Mr. H*wl*tt of the Temple, who was perfectly conversant with the mode of writing for centuries back, conceived that he had discovered, by the aid of magnifying glasses, in one corner, at the bottom of the drawing, faint traces of the name of John Hoskins, who, upon research, proved really to have been an artist of the period of James the First.

For my own part, I must candidly confess, although my eyes are not of the weakest, that even with the aid of magnifiers I could never perceive any thing like a resemblance to the name in question; the whole originating, in my opinion, in the Indian ink of the back ground having assumed a deeper and blacker dye in some of the veins of the paper on which the design was executed than on others.

This commentator, [Edmond Malone] in page 243 of his ponderous Inquiry, speaking of the drawing in question, states as follows: “The originals of the two following coloured prints, one of which presents us with the portrait of an actor (Shakespeare, if you will) in the part of Bassanio in the Merchant of Venice, and the other with that of Shylock in the same play, I have not seen; and if I had seen them, I am not entitled, by any knowledge of the art, to decide upon their merit or authenticity.

But by those who are perfect and indisputable judges in such matters, I have been informed, that, in spite of the process of discolouration by tobacco-water, and of fumigation by smoke and brimstone, which they appear to have undergone in that unknown repository in the country from whence all these curiosities have been issued, they are manifestly washed drawings of a recent date.”

Ever happy to contribute my mite in order to show the upstart pretensions of Mr. Malone as a critic, I shall now, by a simple statement, prove the fallacy of his assertion, and the ignorance of his friends; who, like himself, appear to have been perfect and indisputable judges in such matters.

In the first place, the drawing in question, as purchased by me, was most indisputably as old as the period of James the First: secondly, its real antiquity precluded the necessity of giving to it the appearance of age; nor was it either discoloured with tobacco water or fumigated with smoke and brimstone, as asserted by Mr. Malone’s sapient friends: and, thirdly, with respect to the colouring, excepting in the trifling alterations made by me as before stated, the drawing, instead of being executed in water colours, were made in body colours. And with this statement I shall for the present dismiss the erudite commentator and his friends the limners.

After the conclusions drawn from the scientific researches of Mr. Malone’s friends, I fear that I shall be thought presumptuous in hazarding an opinion with regard to the drawing in question: I shall, notwithstanding, deliver my sentiments on the subject; which are simply as follow: That the drawing was as ancient as the period when Shakespeare lived; and that it was meant to represent the contrast between a penurious money-getting father and the extravagance of his heir, who dissipated on dress and other fooleries those sums which had been amassed with so much industry and unremitting toil.

When the influx of persons to inspect the manuscripts was very great, Mr. Samuel Ireland, by the advice of several gentlemen who were most strenuous in their belief of the papers, drew out a kind of certificate, stating that the undersigned names were affixed by gentlemen who entertained no doubt whatsoever as to the validity of the Shakespearian production, and that they voluntarily gave such public testimony of their ideas upon the subject.

To this certificate several names were affixed by persons as conspicuous for their erudition as they were pertinacious in their opinions. There is scarcely need to add, that, upon my confession of facts, I had no right to expect mercy from the above gentlemen, who were by that means held up to the taunts of Mr. Malone and his inveterate friends the critics.

 

 

As it was generally deemed extraordinary that the productions of Shakespeare should be found so very unequal, and in particular that so much ribaldry should appear throughout his dramatic compositions, I determined on the expedient of rewriting, in the old hand, one of his most conspicuous plays, and making such alterations as I conceived appropriate.

For some time, however, I delayed putting my plan into execution, through an anxious desire to procure a copy of some play of Shakespeare’s published during his life-time; for although I had in my possession the first folio edition of his works, dated in 1623, I was well aware that there existed much earlier copies of each separate drama in quarto.

Having at length discovered that Mr. Samuel Ireland possessed a rare quarto copy of the play of King Lear, and being at liberty to resort to his library whenever I thought proper, I in consequence selected that drama for my purpose; and at convenient opportunities, when unobserved, I took the quarto play in question to the chambers, and there transcribed the same, making interpolations where I conceived they would answer my purpose.

I cannot but advert in this place to Mr. Malone’s observation on the present topic, who states that the rare quartos of any of Shakespeare’s plays were without doubt beyond the reach of the fabricator; who, he conceives, must have transcribed the Lear from the second edition in folio; whereas the manuscript of this play, as above stated, was really copied from one of those rare editions mentioned by Mr. Malone as out of the scope of the forger’s procuring.

As a duplicate of this quarto, which bears date A. D. 1608, is doubtless among the curiosa of Mr. Malone, it is a matter of astonishment that he did not, with his usual pomposity, acquaint the public with that circumstance, as “Vanity, my cousin, is your blind side.”

In the old quarto above mentioned, and in every subsequent edition of the play of King Lear, the following lines are spoken by Kent after the King’s death:

 

I have a journey, sir, shortly to go:

My master calls, and I must not say no.

As I did not conceive such a jingling and unmeaning couplet very appropriate to the occasion, I composed different lines, which I was so arrogant as to believe would not injure the reputation of Shakespeare.

As I scrupulously avoided, in copying the play of Lear, the insertion of that ribaldry which is so frequently found in the compositions of our bard, it was generally conceived that my manuscript proved beyond doubt that Shakespeare was a much more finished writer than had ever before been imagined.

It was also further suggested, that the numerous passages unworthy the sublime genius of Shakespeare which appear throughout all his dramas, were merely introduced in the representation, by the players of that period, and afterwards inserted in the playhouse copies of his productions; from which they were literally printed, and thus given to the world with the numerous alterations so foisted in by the performers to please the taste of the times.

Another of Shakespeare’s dramas on which I ventured my trifling alterations, while copying it over in the old hand, was the popular tragedy of Hamlet. However, as I soon became weary of this plodding business, I only produced a few leaves of this second drama; whereas the Lear was completed within a few lines.

The variations introduced by me in the pages of Hamlet thus executed, tended to strengthen the former opinions as to Shakespeare’s correctness as a writer, while every thing appearing unworthy our bard was laid to the charge of the players and printers of that period.

I shall now advert to a very momentous period, when the whole Shakespearian fabric might instantly have been overturned, as I was then placed at the mercy of a gentleman who had it in his power to betray me.

Some months after my articles had commenced, I formed an acquaintance with Mr. Montague Talbot; who, like myself, was placed with a conveyancer, in order to his studying the law, but whose pursuits were much more calculated to fit him for the business of the theatre. As our meetings were very frequent, I became desirous of introducing Mr. Talbot to Mr. Samuel Ireland; which circumstance soon took place; when Mr. Talbot became a constant visitant in Norfolk Street.

The close connexion, which took place between Mr. Talbot and myself made that gentleman perfectly well acquainted with my research after antiquities, &c. On which account I was frequently the object of his ridicule.

Some time after this friendship was formed, Mr. Talbot quitted London for a few weeks, and during his absence I embarked in the Shakespearian fabrication; for had I been subject, as usual, to the frequent calls of Mr. Talbot, I could never have followed up my plans with such perseverance and escaped detection.

On the return of Mr. Talbot, he visited as usual in Norfolk Street; where he inspected the several documents at that time given in to Mr. S. Ireland. At our next meeting (being, as before stated, well acquainted with my pursuits, and having seen me imitate old hand-writings) he laughingly told me that he was well convinced the deed of Fraser and the other papers were my own fabricating.

To this charge I boldly pleaded the negative; though all my assurances were insufficient to convince him to the contrary of his own assertion.

For some days the business went on as usual, and I was particularly guarded as to the keeping a watchful eye upon every individual who approached the chambers; for I was well convinced that Mr. Talbot’s perseverance would not be easily lulled, as he frequently came in upon me so suddenly that I was with infinite difficulty enabled to conceal from his observation the manuscript on which I then chanced to be engaged.

One day, however, Mr. Talbot found means to elude my observation, by bending himself double, and in that position creeping beneath the window at which I was accustomed to write: thus unobserved he suddenly darted into the chambers, and ere I could find means to conceal the document whereon I was then occupied, he arrested my arm, and by this stratagem became at once acquainted with the whole mystery.

Fully aware that the anger of Mr. S. Ireland would be directed against me in full force were the fabrication discovered to him, I supplicated Mr. Talbot to pledge me his honour that he would never divulge the truth, unless I was desirous that the fact should be made public; to which request he acceded; and it is but justice in me to state, that he never in any one instance was led to divulge the fact, although in the sequel of the transaction he had almost sufficient ground to warrant such a procedure, from the disagreeable circumstances attendant on his having interfered for me in the progress of the fabrication.

After some time had elapsed from Mr. Talbot’s becoming acquainted with the fact, his attachment to theatrical pursuits prompted him to relinquish the study of the law, and he in consequence determined on visiting Dublin; whither he at length set out, after a promise on my part that I would regularly correspond with him, and give a detail of the various documents which I should fabricate during his absence.

After two letters had passed between us, wherein I mentioned without disguise every composition in which I was engaged, Mr. Talbot recommended that we should in future correspond in a manner that would be unintelligible to any other person but ourselves, should any letter be by chance mislaid or miscarry.

The talisman adopted on this occasion was a sheet of paper having several pieces cut from different parts of it; which, when desirous of writing, was placed on a sheet of post paper; when the communication to be made was written on the parts of the post paper appearing through the holes so made in the mutilated sheet; after which the blanks left were filled up with any words, so as to render the whole unintelligible, Mr. Talbot and myself, having each a sheet of paper cut precisely the same, upon receipt of any letter had only to place the same upon the correspondence received, when that part of the epistle which it was intended should be understood became instantly apparent, while the farrago of nonsense with which the remainder of the lines was filled up was of course hidden from observation, leaving the sense only of the letter apparent to the eye, as before stated.

Having so much penmanship to execute, I became less frequent in addressing Mr. Talbot; so that a small portion of the play of Vortigern and Rowena was composed ere Mr. Talbot heard that I had embarked in any such daring enterprise. Upon this occasion Mr. Talbot (having heard it reported in Dublin that such a drama was coming forward, which had been discovered with the other Shakespearian manuscripts) dispatched a letter to me indicatory of his astonishment that I should not have confided the fact to him; which also concluded with informing me that he was then on the very eve of quitting Dublin, on his return to this country and, indeed, scarcely were ten days elapsed from the receipt of this epistle ere Mr. Talbot in person presented himself to me when I made every apology for my remissness in not having written, stating, in extenuation of my conduct (what was no other than fact), that I was literally so harassed in mind, from the various compositions in which I had embarked, as to be wholly unmindful of every other consideration: and indeed, on Mr. Talbot’s inspection of the papers at Mr. Ireland’s house, even he himself was astonished at the numerous manuscripts produced, and the variety of the documents which I had composed during his absence.

As Mr. Talbot was a friend of the Muses, he became anxious to add a portion of his own composition in the course of the production of the Vortigern; and as his continuance in London was but for a few days, I promised that I would send to him, when at Dublin, the plan of some of the scenes of the Vortigern, leaving the language to himself; which, when remitted to me, I was to copy in the disguised hand upon the old paper.

Having entered into this agreement, Mr. Talbot shortly after quitted London for Dublin; but I refrained from dispatching such plans of the scenes as promised, from a conviction that the style of what should be remitted to me by Mr. Talbot would differ from my own most materially: in addition to which, as Mr. Talbot had not been so accustomed to the old method of composition as myself, I thought the introduction of two such opposite styles of writing must tend to a discovery of the fabrication of that drama: and under these assurances, seconded by a degree of vanity which prompted me to aspire solely to the production of the piece, I did not consult Mr. Talbot on the subject, but completed the play without any aid whatsoever on his part.

During Mr. Talbot’s short continuance in London, as various doubts were then hazarded in opposition to the validity of the manuscripts, I prevailed upon that gentleman to join me in the story related: in consequence of which it was agreed between us, that he should forward a letter to Mr. Samuel Ireland, after his departure from London, acquainting him that “he was likewise present with me on the discovery of the papers.” And it was also settled between us, that the name of the supposed donor of the manuscripts should be stated in future as commencing with the letter H.

At this private interview, when the above agreement took place, we also mutually destroyed every letter which had previously passed between us; so that no one document then existed to prove the fact respecting the fabrication of the papers by myself. And immediately after this meeting, Mr. M. Talbot again set out for Dublin.

Under the foregoing heads is contained every statement with regard to Mr. Montague Talbot’s discovery of the transaction and his subsequent connexion with me in the business: and it is but justice in me to remark, in the present instance, that every step thus taken by Mr. Talbot was only done at my most earnest request, in order that he might in some measure extricate me from the labyrinth of perplexity wherein I had so innocently involved myself.

After the completion of the play of Vortigern and Rowena, without the interference of Mr. Talbot, notwithstanding his request made to that effect previous to his departure from London, a letter came to me from Ireland, part of which I have here deemed it necessary to insert, as it not only goes to prove the statement as to our mutual agreement respecting H previous to his departure, but also tends to establish the veracity of my assertion; as will be explained under the article which follows the ensuing quotation.

 

Quotation From Mr. M. Talbot’s Letter.

Dear friend, 6th Jan. 1796.

It is now a month, I believe, since I wrote to your father a particular account of the discovery of Vortigern, with every thing that has passed before and since the fortunate finding it at H’s. I wrote by the same post to yourself: begged you to show H the letter I wrote your father, and keep a copy yourself. Now I think it rather hard I am not favoured with an answer, and that my particular request is not complied with. I asked for a copy of Vortigern and Rowena, as curtailed for representation: now, although you neglect me so much as to withhold the copy of the play, which you know when in London I had not time to read, and which you may naturally suppose I would wish to know almost as I would all Shakespeare’s works, yet mark how I am situated, and then you will not blame me for renewing my request: Every one knows here the concern I have with Vortigern and Rowena, and every one asks for the particulars: I then show the copy of the letter sent your father; but when I am asked as to the play and its merits, plot, beauties, etc, I know nothing. It is much wondered at that I can give no account of its coming out. Some ask me if I have not in my possession any scrap of the writings of Shakespeare. So I request you will send me some bill, receipt, or letter of this.

 

As the whole superstructure of the Shakespearian manuscripts was reared on the basis of falsehood, and as some opinions have erroneously gone abroad that I was not the sole writer of the papers, I have consequently sought every means to establish this position, that, however a man may once act erroneously, he may at some subsequent period become convinced of his error, and seek to make atonement.

I have under this conviction made the foregoing quotation, in order to prove that I alone was concerned in the composition of the manuscripts. Not that I am desirous of arrogating any merit to myself from the language contained in the manuscripts, but that I wish to establish my veracity in this instance.

Mr. Talbot, in the foregoing quotation from his letter, alludes to his having agreed with me as to his connexion with the manuscripts. He also mentions the supposed donor, under the letter H: and in speaking of the play of Vortigern, he confesses that he knows nothing of its “merits, plot, beauties”, which would not have proved the case had Mr. Talbot aided me in the completion of the play.

I have only to add, that I am heartily sorry that Mr. Talbot’s kindness should have led him to sanction the business, and in any way connect his name with an affair which has involved its author in so much difficulty: and with this apology I shall conclude the present statement.

When the idea of writing a play first took possession of my mind, I continued for some days undecided as to the subject most appropriate to the purpose; when a large drawing, executed by Mr. S. Ireland (being a copy from a design of Mortimer’s) representing Rowena in the act of presenting wine to Vortigern, and which hung over the chimneypiece in Mr. Ireland’s study, suddenly attracted my attention.

In consequence, when alone I took down Mr. Ireland’s edition of Holinshed’s Chronicle, and referred to the story of Vortigern as related by that historian; when, conceiving it apt to my purpose, I immediately planned the outline of the play; and with my usual impetuosity made known to Mr. Ireland the discovery of such a piece, before a single line was really executed.

In consequence of which I was unceasingly tormented for the manuscript; which I brought forward in small portions, as I found time to compose it, in my own hand-writing, pretending to have copied it from the original: and I believe I may with safety aver, that the play, though procrastinated in the delivery, did not actually occupy more than two months time in the composing; notwithstanding the inconveniences I had to surmount from Mr. Ireland’s unceasing applications, from the questionings of the numerous persons who inspected the papers, and the difficulty I found in snatching opportunities to proceed with the manuscript.

It is extraordinary to observe how willingly persons will blind themselves on any point interesting to their feelings. When it was known that a play on the subject of Vortigern was coming forward, every person who inspected the manuscripts admired the strange coincidence of Mr. Ireland’s having so long possessed a drawing on the very subject of that drama; yet do I not recollect, even in one instance, that the drawing in question excited the smallest suspicion of the fact above stated, which was unquestionably more consonant with probability.

A considerable time after the production of this play, some believer in the papers desired Mr. Ireland to refer to Milton’s works; wherein it appears that he has mentioned the story of Vortigern and Rowena, with some others, as very appropriate for the drama.

Thus have I precisely stated every fact, as to the first idea of the piece having taken possession of my mind. I therefore need scarcely add, that Milton’s note upon the subject was totally unknown to me till after the completion of the play as before mentioned, when that fact was stated to me by Mr. S. Ireland.

Being considerably under the age of eighteen when I wrote the play of Vortigern, the following fact will not appear singular. I was really so unacquainted with the proper length of a drama as to be compelled to count the number of lines in one of Shakespeare’s plays, and on that standard to frame the Vortigern; and the play I had chosen happening to be uncommonly long, mine consequently became so: when completed, it contained, to the best of my recollection, two thousand eight hundred lines and upwards.

Upon observing this, Mr. Sh*r*d*n remarked, that “the purchase of the play was at any rate a good one, as there were two plays and a half, instead of one.” I believe that fourteen hundred lines are quite sufficient for a regular drama of the present day.

When it was known that a play had been found among the supposed Shakespearian relics, Mr. H*rr*s of Covent Garden theatre, ever anxious for the advancement of the interests of that house, and naturally conceiving, that, if well received by a British audience, a newly discovered play of Shakespeare’s must prove a source of great profit to the theatre, dispatched Mr.W*U*ce (father of the then actress of that name) with a carte blanche, in order that Mr. Ireland might state his terms: yet the long acquaintance of our family with certain persons connected with the other theatre, and the promise made to them that the Vortigern should be performed on that stage (not withstanding the dilatory conduct of the managers of that house as to the completion of the business), prompted Mr. Ireland to reject the very handsome proposition made by Mr. H*rr*s: at whose theatre had the piece been represented I have heard it generally affirmed that it would have succeeded; for at that house there was no jarring interest; and whether the papers were accredited or not by Messrs. Steevens and Malone was nothing to the purpose; every  performer would THERE have done his duty, and exerted himself for the benefit of his employers.

How far such a line of conduct was pursued at Drury Lane, is too generally known for me to comment upon in the present instance.

When it was agreed that Vortigern and Rowena should be represented at Drury Lane theatre, Mr. S. Ireland had very frequent conversations with Mr. Sh*r*d*n respecting the transcendent genius of our bard; and one day in particular, after Mr. S. Ireland had been as usual lavish in his encomiums, Mr. Sh*r*d*n remarked, that, however high Shakespeare might stand in the estimation of the public in general, he did not for his part regard him as a poet in that exalted light, although he allowed the brilliancy of his ideas, and the penetration of his mind.

Previous to the agreement being signed respecting Vortigern and Rowena with the managers of Drury Lane theatre, Messrs. Sh*r*d*n and R*ch*rds*n waited upon Mr. Ireland, to inspect the fair copy of the play, which had been made from the manuscript as produced in the disguised hand.

After having perused several pages, Mr. Sh*r*d*n came to one line which was not strictly poetic; upon which, turning to Mr. Ireland, he remarked, “This is rather strange; for though you are acquainted with my opinion as to Shakespeare, yet, be it as it may, he certainly always wrote poetry.”

Having perused a few pages further, Mr. Sh*r*d*n again paused, and, laying down the manuscript, spoke to the following effect: “There are certainly some bold ideas, but they are crude and undigested. It is very odd: one would be led to think that Shakespeare must have been very young when he wrote the play. As to the doubting whether it be really his or not, who can possibly look at the papers, and not believe them ancient?”

After the most unaccountable procrastination, the terms of the deed, as to the purchase of the Vortigern by Mr. Sh*r*d*n, were agreed upon, and the papers drawn up by Mr. Albany Wallis of Norfolk Street; Mr. S. Ireland being made trustee for me, as I was then under age.

The terms of the agreement were, that Mr. Sh*r*d*n should pay down three hundred pounds, and that the profits of the performance for the first sixty nights [that I believe to have been the number] should be equally divided between Mr. Samuel Ireland and Mr. Sh*r*d*n, after deducting the necessary expenses of the theatre; which sum was also specified, but has now entirely escaped my memory.

The three hundred pounds was paid in notes of hand, at short dates, drawn upon Mr. H*mm*rsly the banker, out of which I received sixty pounds, I have thought it necessary to mention this circumstance, that the charge of avarice may not be attributed to me; such an idea having never once entered my mind during the whole period I was occupied in the fabrication of the papers: and indeed I must add, it would have been diametrically opposite to the established laws of nature, had I at the age of seventeen years and three quarters regularly entered upon such a scheme for the express purpose of amassing money: and I will boldly challenge any person to come forward and accuse me, in any one instance, of a desire of securing to myself any portion of the profits which might be derived from the manuscripts.

The following instance is in itself sufficient to evince the undue influence used by Mr. Malone, in order to establish his own opinions, and prejudice the public mind against the manuscripts. For some weeks previous to the performance of the play of Vortigern, Mr. Malone had daily given intimation that his Inquiry into the Validity of the Papers attributed to Shakespeare was on the eve of publication.

The volume, however, did not appear until after the representation of the piece. In order, therefore, that Mr. Malone might not be backward on this occasion, it was stated in the course of the day that a handbill was to be delivered at the several avenues leading to Drury Lane theatre, which was to contain an affirmation, that Mr. Malone, in his work, would prove the whole to be a rank forgery; and that, consequently, he had issued the said paper in order to caution persons against the fraud, and lead them to judge of the play in its proper light.

In consequence of this intelligence, Mr. S. Ireland caused a handbill to be printed, wherein he stated his knowledge of the modes that were adopted by Mr. Malone in opposition to the play; and requested that all persons who should attend the representation of the piece would lay aside any prejudices that might arise in consequence of such invidious attacks, and suffer the piece to speak for itself.

Such I know to have been the purport of Mr. Ireland’s printed paper; although at present I am unable to find out one of the handbills in question, the contents of which should have otherwise met the eye of the public.

It is almost impossible to convey an adequate idea of the influx of persons who came to behold the representation of Vortigern. Every seat in the boxes had been previously taken; and so eager were the public to witness the fate of the play, that numerous persons paid the box prices, not being able to pass the pit door with sufficient expedition: after which, finding all the places in the boxes in keeping for the various parties who had bespoken them for weeks previous, they dropped down from the lower tier of boxes into the pit, in order to procure seats.

The box occupied by Mr. Samuel Ireland and his friends was in the centre of the house. It was even stated, though (I imagine) erroneously, that on Mr. Ireland’s appearance in the theatre there was some indication of applause from different parts of the house. I did not enter the theatre till a very short period previous to the rising of the curtain; and the box being so very conspicuous, I soon retired from observation behind the scenes; where I continued the greater part of the time of representation, engaged in conversation with Mrs. Jordan.

As the native sweetness of Mrs. Jordan’s voice had so invariably excited public approbation, I conceived that by writing a ditty expressly for that lady I should in a great measure benefit the piece when represented. In consequence of this supposition, I composed the annexed verses, which were very ably set to music by William Linley, Esq., and were received with unbounded plaudits, when sung by the inimitable actress above mentioned, on the night of the representation of the play.

I should here acquaint the reader, in order to account for the statement above (that the ditty was expressly composed for Mrs. Jordan), that every leading character introduced in the Vortigern was positively written for some certain performer: and it was for the same reason that I caused Mrs. Jordan to assume the male attire, as she was so universally allowed to become the male costume.

There is something so appalling in the conviction that a man does not stand upon the basis of truth, which he shrinks with terror when circumstances appear most favourable to his wishes. On the important night which was to seal the fate of my long-expected Vortigern and Rowena, I spent the greater part of the time of its representation in the green-room of the theatre; where, I conversed for the most part with Mrs. Jordan, who, at the commencement of the third act (at which period not a dissenting voice had been heard) congratulated me on the success of the piece, and gave it as her opinion that it would succeed. I am by no means superstitious, but a presentiment had taken possession of my mind (originating in the knowledge of the deception which characterised the whole production), which led me to augur very differently: and I then returned for answer, “That, notwithstanding appearances were auspicious to the success of the play, I felt a full conviction that it would not be a second time represented.” How far my conjecture proved just, was fully demonstrated by the event of that night’s representation.

When the fate of Vortigern was decided, I returned, in company with Mr. S. Ireland, to Norfolk Street, where a few gentlemen shortly after arrived to converse on the events of the evening. As I found it more than probable that they would remain in conversation till a late hour, I retired to bed, more easy in my mind than I had been for a great length of time, as the load was removed which had oppressed me.

I that night slept most profoundly, and even awoke in the morning much later than usual: and, on descending to breakfast, I was upbraided for my want of feeling on so momentous an occasion; and the general wonder was, how I could possibly sleep at all after such an event, which had deprived me of so great an emolument as would have accrued in case the play had been attended with success.

On applying to the treasurer of Drury Lane theatre, the morning after the fate of the Vortigern had been decided, Mr. S. Ireland was given to understand that there were two hundred and six pounds in the treasury, after the payment of all expenses: consequently the division of that sum took place between the manager and Mr. S. Ireland, who received one hundred and three pounds; out of which I had the sum of thirty pounds, which, together with the sixty pounds received out of the three hundred pounds paid by Mr. Hammersly, conformably to the agreement on the delivery of the manuscript of Vortigern and Rowena, made me a gainer of ninety pounds by the papers: and if I ever received one farthing in addition, let those who can controvert this statement boldly challenge me as to the fact, and establish, if possible, the falsehood of my position.

It is astonishing to observe how very frequently persons neglect opportunities which present themselves of realising money. Either from bad advice or some secret motive, Mr. Samuel Ireland, instead of publishing the play of Vortigern on the night of its representation, deferred the bringing of it forward until after I had confessed that the manuscripts were the productions of my own pen; whereas had Mr. Ireland followed a different line of conduct, the profits of the piece would have been exceedingly great; for having some time after demanded the opinion of Mr. Barker, the bookseller, of Russel Street, Covent Garden, respecting the publication of that play, he stated to me as follows: “Sir, had Mr. Samuel Ireland applied to me ten days previous to the night of the performance of the piece, and desired to know what I would have given for the manuscript of the Vortigern, I would have bound myself under any penalty not to have made one copy public before the hour on the night of its representation; and, under such a restriction, I would gladly have paid him one thousand guineas for the copy-right, taking every risk upon myself as to the future sale of the production.”

A considerable period having transpired from the representation of Vortigern at Drury Lane theatre, Mr. Samuel Ireland applied to Mr. Barker to become the publisher of that drama, as well as the Henry the Second, which soon afterwards appeared, and is at the present moment to be purchased at his shop in Russel Street.

I cannot close this statement respecting Mr. Barker without offering him my sincere thanks for many curious facts contained in these volumes which would have otherwise escaped my recollection, as well as for his kindness in having obliged me by the loan of several pamphlets on the subject of the manuscripts, which are now out of print and very rarely to be found.

Some time after the production of the play of King Henry the Second, Mr. S. Ireland accidentally met with a passage in the Biographia Dramatica which tended greatly to strengthen the believers in the manuscripts in their opinion of the originality of the play of Henry the Second.

Had the play of Vortigern succeeded with the public, and the manuscripts been acknowledged as genuine, it was my intention to have completed a series of plays from the reign of William the Conqueror to that of Queen Elizabeth; that is to say, I should have planned a drama on every reign the subject of which had not been treated of by Shakespeare.

Having perused several curious interludes and sacred mysteries, from the pen of Bayle, &c., I determined on producing a performance of the same nature, and selected the subject of the Devil and Richard the Third; supposing it to have been performed, immediately after the coronation of King Henry the Seventh, by the singing boys of St. Paul’s cathedral.

I made a considerable advance in this interlude which I had written fair upon vellum, emblazoning the margins and capital letters in the missal style. Upon my discovery of the whole Shakespearian business, as much as was executed of the performance in question fell into the hands of Mr. George Steevens, who procured it from Mr. Richardson, printseller, in the Strand.

Many objections continued to be raised against the scorched appearance of all the papers (which I have fully accounted for, till a circumstance occurred, at a period when the papers were very voluminous, which seemed to throw a new light on the business, and even more strongly to validate the authenticity of the manuscripts.

Mr. S. Ireland, upon inquiry, was credibly informed, by persons who had known Mr. Warburton, that a fire happened at his house, in the neighbourhood of Fleet Street, about thirty-six years before, that destroyed all his effects, amongst which were many books and manuscripts. Many of these papers were shrewdly surmised to have been the writings of Shakespeare: so that when that circumstance was stated to me, who was anxious to catch at any substantiated fact which might apply to the papers, I consequently stated “that the world, I trusted, would no longer entertain a doubt as to the validity of the papers, as their burned appearance was now accounted for by their having been rescued during the conflagration of Mr. Warburton’s property.”

The influx of persons to see the manuscripts increased to such a degree as to render it necessary that some regular plan should be adopted, in order that Mr. Ireland’s house might not be an exhibition at all hours of the day: in consequence of which, cards were printed in the following terms, which were distributed among the subscribers to the Shakespearian volume; each of whom was entitled to bring with him one gentleman or lady, to inspect the papers, on the days appointed (being Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays), between the hours of twelve and three:

 

SHAKESPEARE

Admit a subscriber, to view the Shakespeare papers,

at No. 8, Norfolk Street, Strand, day of 1795.

 

As the papers at this period had excited universal attention, and as Mr. S. Ireland conceived, that, if published, they would give infinite satisfaction to the public, and prove a source of benefit to his family, I was of course applied to, in order to know whether the supposed gentleman would have any objection to the manuscripts being printed: my reply was immediately as follows: “they were only given to me as curiosities; and by no means will the gentleman agree to their being made public.”

From that period the above question was unceasingly put to me; and with some degree of warmth Mr. Ireland would frequently remark, “If the gentleman be a friend of yours, why does he set his face against a publication which it is admitted on all hands would be productive of a fortune to you?”

My reply was still invariably the same. At length these constant importunities rendered life almost insupportable and I then for the first time ventured to question Mr. Ireland in the following manner: “Suppose they should not be really manuscripts of Shakespeare’s?”

The reply was: “If all the men of abilities living were now to come forward and severally attest that each had undertaken his particular part to produce those papers, I would not believe them.” The fact was, I had an idea of hazarding every opprobrium, and confessing the fact, rather than witness the publication of the papers: but when such an answer was made to my first inquiry, I very naturally concluded, if Mr. Ireland be of such an opinion, how will he credit the affirmation that I have alone planned and executed the papers.

From that period I became even more uncomfortable: and one day after dinner, some warm conversation having transpired, I exclaimed, in the heat of the moment, and to procure some peace, “Well, sir, if you are determined on publishing the papers, remember, I deliver this message from the gentleman, you do it at your own risk, as he will have no concern in the business, or ever give up his name to the world.”

“On those terms I very willingly accept his acquiescence,” was Mr. Ireland’s reply; and from that moment the intended publication of the work was announced to the world.

The following was the plan of the proposal delivered to such persons as came to view the manuscripts when the publication of the papers was decided upon by Mr. Samuel Ireland:

SHAKESPEARE

 

Norfolk Street, Strand, March 4, 1795.

Mr. Samuel Ireland begs leave to acquaint the public, that the literary treasure which has recently fallen into his hands, forming an interesting part of the works of our divine bard, Shakespeare, is now arranging, and will speedily be put to press.

This publication will consist of a variety of authentic and important documents respecting the private and public life of this wondrous man; an original complimentary letter from Queen Elizabeth, under her own hand, and authenticated by that of the bard; original deeds, contracts, and other instruments relative to his theatrical concern; an original correspondence with a noble personage upon a transaction nearly interesting to himself; a letter, and five stanzas in verse, written in his own hand when very young, and addressed to the lady whom he afterwards married; together with the expression and feeling of his very soul upon a subject the most momentous that can occupy the thoughts of mortal man.

All these papers, except the legal instruments, are in his hand-writing, and these are under the hand and seal of himself, and the parties concerned. In this publication will likewise be given a copy of the tragedy of King Lear, from the original manuscript, in the hand-writing of Shakespeare. This copy will be found materially to differ, in various particulars of much curiosity and interest, from any edition of that play now extant.

In this volume facsimiles will be given of the above miscellaneous manuscripts, and of the title-page, and first and last leaves of the play, which, Mr. Ireland presumes, will be deemed sufficient specimens of the whole.

The work will be further illustrated with engravings from original drawings which have been found among the manuscripts above mentioned, and which will add new lights to the history of the British stage, of which Shakespeare may truly be denominated the mighty father.

This publication will be comprised in one volume, to correspond with the folio edition of Shakespeare now printing at the Shakespeare press, and will be forwarded for publication with all possible dispatch.

As this work will be attended with considerable expense and trouble, Mr. Ireland receives subscriptions at his house in Norfolk Street; Mr. Faulder’s, in New Bond Street; Mr. Egerton’s, at Whitehall; Mr. Payne’s, at the Mews Gate; Messrs. White’s, in Fleet Street; and at Messrs. Leigh and Sotheby’s, York Street, Covent Garden.

The price to subscribers will be four guineas. Any gentleman, on sending his address in writing or being introduced by a subscriber, may view the MSS., at No. 8, Norfolk Street, on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, between the hours of twelve and three.

Mr. Ireland acquaints every gentleman who has paid his subscription, and who has not seen the papers, that if on viewing them he feels any doubt respecting their authenticity, he may instantly have his subscription returned.

Mr. Ireland informs the public, that with the above papers was discovered an historical play, founded on the story of Vortigern and Rowena, taken from Holinshed, and which is in the hand-writing of Shakespeare.

This play being intended for theatrical representation, will not be printed till the eve of its appearance on the stage.

At the close of the celebrated [Malone] Inquiry into the authenticity of the supposed Shakespearian manuscripts (consisting of upwards of 400 pages, written expressly to prove that a forgery which the author asserts was so palpable a one as to be discoverable at the first glance), Mr. Malone falls into one of his Hibernian slumbers, and in that somniferous state supposes himself wafted to the court of Apollo, to hear the judgement of that god on the daring impostor.

Having perused the farrago of nonsense, in the dream alluded to, Mr. Ireland wrote the following impromptu.

 

With a sorrowful phiz, sage Minerva, one morn,

Apollo bespoke, on Parnassus high steep:

‘Tis stated Malone is come here!

With just scorn Apollo replied,

He was here in his sleep.

 

In the above-mentioned dream Mr. Malone is honoured with the sight of several of our poetic ancestors, who are facetiously engaged in a game at bowls; and among the rest he instantly recognises his dear friend William Shakespeare, occupied with the same amusement, from the strong resemblance he bore to the only authentic portrait of him, which belonged to the late Duke of Chandos, and of which, says the egotist, “I have three copies by eminent masters.”

I will not exactly vouch for the truth of the following statement, but I was absolutely informed that after Mr. Malone had perused the above lines, in a volume relative to my Shakespearian fabrication, which was placed in his hands, he returned the book in question stating, “There is but one more document I wish to see respecting him,” alluding to myself: “and what is that, sir?” was the interrogatory. “His last dying speech and confession,” answered the commentator with petulance, delivering the volume into the hands of the person to whom he had so addressed himself.

Among the rest of my productions was a large head of our bard, which I executed on vellum, in body colours, affixing his Arms in one corner and his name and age in another. This performance, I know not why, was supposed to be from the hand of the facetious master Cowley, the player; and was gravely stated to have formerly adorned the green-room of the Globe theatre, in all probability as a companion to the Shylock and Bassanio drawing which has been before mentioned.

As I had left a broad space beneath the painting, I conceived that I might turn it to account, and for that purpose wrote the following lines, as from the pen of Ben Jonson, whereto I affixed his name: but, as the composition did not exactly please me, I took care to efface the whole previous to its delivery to Mr. Ireland; leaving, however, the signature of Jonson legible, which I had copied from his handwriting affixed to the first edition in folio of Shakespeare’s plays, which I had purchased of White, in Fleet Street, for thirty guineas, at which high price it was sold because conceived to be (and I have no doubt that it really was) the presentation copy from the editors of Shakespeare’s plays to Ben Jonson: in confirmation of which, some lines in Latin had been written over the signature of Jonson, which the binder of an earlier period had cut through, but from the remains of which the words were obvious.

In order to augment the bulk of the Shakespearian papers, I had recourse to the introducing of volumes and tracts (to about the number of eighty), containing notes written in the disguised hand, while on the title-page of each appeared the signature of William Shakespeare; by which I meant to infer that the books in question had originally been in the possession of our bard: of which volumes, the ensuing were the most conspicuous, as containing a variety of annotations, presumed to be from the pen of our dramatist, relative to the authors of the works in question.

This tract was a small quarto, and, independent of the notes on its margin, annexed by myself (that were thought to render it invaluable), was a very curious poem, printed in 1587; and being one of the first documents of this nature produced, was esteemed highly interesting by the inspectors of the fabricated papers.

This work, bearing date A. D. 1550, records, in poetry, the prominent features of all our monarchs’ reigns to that period. Upon the margin of this production I annexed several manuscript notes; and, to the best of my recollection, was particular in affixing the same to those particular monarchs’ reigns which have been dramatised by our immortal poet.

Upon the margins of this poem, printed in two volumes quarto, bearing respectively the dates 1590 and 1596, I was most particular in my comments; well aware that a writer of such celebrity as Spenser must have attracted the notice of Shakespeare; in addition to which, I was fully convinced that such notes would be regarded with the strictest scrutiny by every visitant in Norfolk Street.

The subsequent event fully established the justness of my supposition: and so much were the notes esteemed, and such was the value conceived to be thereby attached to the two volumes, that a gentleman (who shall be nameless), positively made an offer to Mr. Samuel Ireland of sixty pounds for this edition of Spenser’s Faerie Queene, with the marginal notes so introduced by myself as the comments of William Shakespeare.

This tract, bearing date A.D. 1606, is comprised in about twenty pages octavo, and gives a circumstantial detail of the manner in which Guy Fawkes and his associates suffered the punishment awarded them for their diabolical attempt against their sovereign and his Parliament.

My annotations upon this little pamphlet were very diffuse. I particularly remember that on the margin of the page in which it is stated that Guy Fawkes was so emaciated as scarcely to be able to ascend the scaffold, I wrote a very feeling note, indicative of the philanthropy of Shakespeare; who at the conclusion of the note was supposed to make the following remark: “That he William Shakespeare had been entreated by his friend John Hemynges to attend said execution, but that he liked not to behold sights of that kind.”

I believe on the margin containing the last quoted I wrote another note, purporting that Shakespeare remembered to have seen and conversed with master Guy Fawkes at the Globe theatre; and that from his manners he should not have taken him for such a man as he afterwards proved to be.

Upon mentioning this circumstance to Mr. James Caulfield, well known for his research into the history of this conspiracy, he convinced me that I had been guilty of a most flagrant error, by assuring me, that, if Shakespeare had really remembered him, it must have been by the name of Guy Johnson, as that of Fawkes was only an assumed name when he entered into the conspiracy.

I need scarcely add that this fact was till then wholly unknown to me; as when I wrote the annotations in question I had no idea whatsoever but that the name of Fawkes was the real appellation of that celebrated traitor, whose sanguinary character is still preserved to public detestation on the fifth day of each succeeding November.

After this tract had been displayed to the inspectors of the papers, some of them, who were notorious as collectors of rare books, declared to Mr. Ireland that they had never before seen a copy of it. This declaration conferred additional value on the document in question: and many black-letter collectors visited Norfolk Street for the sole purpose of viewing the tract as a typographical rarity.

Notwithstanding the acknowledged curiosity of this pamphlet, it is not a little wonderful that within a month from my delivering to Mr. Samuel Ireland the copy illustrated with the marginal notes before described, a second happened by chance to fall into my hands, bound up with several other miscellaneous pamphlets.

To the title page of this duplicate copy I annexed the name of Shakespeare, with the following note: “This little book I had had once before” evidently alluding to the former copy.

Such are the facts relative to the two impressions of the rare tract explanatory of the imprisonment and execution of the gunpowder conspirators, which created so much astonishment in the mind of every collector of black-letter rarities.

One day being seated at Mr. Samuel Ireland’s after dinner, during the exhiliration of the moment I was so bereft of my senses as to inform Mr. Ireland that a whole-length portrait, as large as life, and painted on board, would be forthcoming among the various other documents. I had soon sufficient cause to rue this effervescence of the moment; for scarcely a day transpired but I was hourly importuned respecting the whole-length portrait; the production of which, it was stated, would infallibly stamp the validity of the manuscripts.

Another very ridiculous assurance made by myself to Mr. Ireland, without a possibility of its realisation, was the promise of two copies in folio of Shakespeare’s works with uncut leaves, for which I was equally tormented as for the whole-length portrait of our bard above alluded to.

As Mr. Ireland was given to understand that his royal highness [Prince of Wales] was desirous of inspecting the papers, from the variety of opinions which he had heard upon the manuscripts, and the natural curiosity the subject excited in every breast, Mr. Ireland made it known, through the medium of some friends, that he would cheerfully attend upon any of the royal family with the papers for their inspection.

In consequence of this, a day was appointed, and Mr. Samuel Ireland repaired in a coach to Carlton House, with all the documents he possessed: but I was not made one of the party on that occasion. On his return, as I was of course very anxious to hear what had transpired, I requested a circumstantial detail of every occurrence attending his visit; which was to the best of my recollection as follows: Upon Mr. Ireland’s entrance into the chamber, his royal highness, with that refinement upon affability for which he is certainly unrivalled, arose to receive him; and so completely divested himself of that dignity which from his situation he was so justly entitled to assume, as to render Mr. Ireland as unrestrained in his manners as if he had been in the company of his equals. In ine, Mr. Ireland’s opinion of his royal highness, which I very frequently afterwards heard him utter, was, that his affability and elegant ease were such as to enable a person to be perfectly unrestrained; while it was at the same time absolutely impossible for a well-bred man to presume, in the slightest degree, in consequence of that easy deportment which his royal highness adopted: but should a presumptuous freedom be hazarded, Mr. Ireland used frequently to assert, that the prince in such circumstances could instantly have recourse to a dignified deportment which must awe the most daring effrontery.

On the production of the manuscripts, his royal highness began to inspect them with the strictest scrutiny; when, to Mr. Ireland’s infinite astonishment, he not only questioned him on every point with an acuteness which he had never before witnessed from the learned who had inspected the papers, but he also displayed a knowledge of antiquity, and an intimate acquaintance with documents of the period of Elizabeth, which Mr. Ireland had conceived was confined to such individuals only as had made that particular subject the object of their study.

Having carefully examined the manuscripts, and heard the language contained in the profession of faith and some other documents, which were read aloud by Mr. Ireland, his royal highness spoke to the following effect: As far as the external appearance will witness for the validity of the documents, they certainly bear a strong semblance of age: to decide, however, peremptorily from this cursory inspection, would be unjustifiable; as in matters of this nature so much is to be said pro and con, that the decision requires mature reflexion. I certainly, Mr. Ireland, must compliment you much upon the discovery; as the name of Shakespeare, and every thing appertaining to him, is not confined alone to the literary world, but to the English nation; to which the publication will, I trust, afford that gratification which is expected to be derived from it.”

While Mr. Ireland was arranging the manuscripts in order to their being taken back to the carriage, the prince continued to deliver his remarks on the papers he had inspected: and wheresoever the smallest ground of objection was apparent to his mind, he requested from Mr. Ireland an answer to his query, which was always put with ease, although a depth of penetration was apparent in the question; to which, from its novelty, Mr. Ireland very frequently found it difficult to make an apt reply.

Upon Mr. Ireland’s quitting the prince’s presence, his royal highness continued to display that urbanity which had characterised his conduct upon his first introduction into the chamber. Such proved the visit of Mr. Ireland to Carlton House, as frequently detailed by himself.

In consequence of the general astonishment and curiosity excited by the manuscripts, his royal highness the duke of Clarence also became desirous of inspecting the papers: which being intimated to Mr. Ireland, a time was fixed upon; when I was made of the party, and with Mr. Samuel Ireland repaired to the apartments occupied by his royal highness in St. James’ palace.

Having carefully inspected all the documents produced, the usual questions were put to me respecting the original discovery of the manuscripts, in which Mrs. J*rd*n also joined; when my former statements were, as usual, strictly adhered to. His royal highness, I perfectly well remember, made numerous objections, and particularly to the redundancy of letters apparent throughout the papers. To every question however, the same answers were made as usual: and thus the doubts which arose in his royal highness’ mind were obviated by Mr. Ireland.

As the agreement for the Vortigern and Rowena was then on the point of being signed between Mr. Samuel Ireland, as my guardian, and the managers of Drury Lane theatre, much conversation took place upon that subject; in the course of which his royal highness was so kind as to give Mr. Samuel Ireland many cautious hints.

Respecting the language of the piece, as well as the plot and characters, numerous inquiries were made by Mrs. J*rd*n, as well as the duke of Clarence: and I think it but justice in this place to offer my sincere thanks to that lady for her kind endeavours on a subsequent occasion, when she had to sustain one of the principal characters in the drama.

I also beg leave to state that I shall be ever mindful of her particular kindness and affability during the visit made to his royal highness; as also for her complacency and condescension during my long continuance in the green-room of Drury Lane theatre on the night of the representation of my play, when not only her transcendent abilities as an actress were exerted in my behalf before the curtain, but reanimating expressions, whilst in the green-room, continually flowed from her lips, in order to rouse me from the mental depression under which I so obviously laboured on that momentous occasion.

As it was supposed, in consequence of my statements before mentioned, that some unknown gentleman was the original donor of the papers, the inquiries that were set on foot in order to his discovery were incalculable: neither was I forgotten in my walks; for as it was supposed that I must have constant meetings with him, it was imagined, that, by tracing my steps, the residence of my mysterious friend must be discovered: which would have undoubtedly proved the case, had there been any such being in existence: but the whole concentrating in myself, and it being conjectured, on account of my youth, that I never could be the fabricator, little notice was taken of me when at chambers, where the whole was executed.

If, on the contrary, such steps had been taken, I must have been discovered; as by picking the lock of a window-seat the whole of my apparatus would have been displayed to view. I must here state, that towards the termination of the business, when doubts ran very high respecting the authenticity of the manuscripts, I destroyed an infinite number of unfinished papers then in my possession that no document might appear in evidence against me.

This gentleman, Mr. C*L*Y, who is well known as an excellent judge of ancient manuscripts, and who is perfectly well enabled to decipher with ease the most abbreviated documents, the productions of centuries back, was a frequent inspector of my manuscripts; and although he in many instances raised objections to the papers, he nevertheless did upon the whole conceive them the productions of the period to which ascribed them.

Before stating thus much, however, I should have premised that Mr. C*L*Y inspected them merely as a judge of the paper, parchment, and general appearance of ancient documents, without any regard to the language or particular history of the stage during the period of William Shakespeare.

Of the numerous individuals who came to inspect the manuscripts, no one excited my fear so much as Mr. Ritson, whose keen penetration is by no means unknown to the sapient Mr. Malone, on whose abilities as a commentator he has so fully expatiated as to render him contemptible where he conceives himself deserving of universal panegyric.

The sharp physiognomy, the piercing eye, and the silent scrutiny, of Mr. Ritson, filled me with a dread I had never before experienced. His questionings were laconic, but always to the purpose. No studied flow of words could draw him from his purpose: he was not to be hoodwinked: and after satisfying his curiosity, he departed from Mr. Samuel Ireland’s house, without delivering any opinion, or committing himself in the smallest circumstance.

In fine, I do as firmly believe that Mr. Ritson went away fully assured that the papers were spurious, as that I have existence at this moment.

This gentleman, Mr. George Steevens, whose memory will be handed down to posterity as long as commentaries on Shakespeare exist, followed his usual mode of conduct with respect to the fabricated manuscripts: he did not boldly enter the lists; but, like a mole, worked in secret; and, when occasion served, stung with the subtlety of a viper.

Whether this gentleman lent his friendly aid to Mr. Malone, in the course of his Inquiry, I will not pretend to say, though I rather conceive, that upon that occasion, the rival commentators, like the two kings of Brentford, smelt at one nosegay, and buried their private feelings in the general attempt to crush that which would have proved so many of their labours of non effect had it passed current with the world.

When the multiplicity of the papers became an object of wonder, it was stated, by some of the visitants at Mr. Samuel Ireland’s house, that, if a descendant of Shakespeare could be found, he might lay claim to all the papers which I had produced.

Astonished at this information, I began to think of some method which might obviate any such step being put into effect, even should a claimant appear; as I conceived it would be hard indeed that my own productions should go into the hands of an utter stranger. After many thoughts upon this subject, I had recourse to the following expedient.

Shortly after the above statement, I produced some documents tending to prove that Shakespeare had been very closely connected with a person of the name of Ireland; and so very unguarded was I upon this occasion, as to make the Christian names of the supposed Ireland similar to my own, being William-Henry.

These papers tended to prove that our bard laboured under some weighty obligation to my namesake; whilst others were penned in the most familiar style. And by these means I began to pave the way to my rightful claim to my own productions.

In addition to the folly of my having affixed precisely my own Christian names to the surname of the Ireland supposed to have been so intimately connected with our bard, it afterwards appeared that the assumption of two Christian names was scarcely ever used in the days of Shakespeare, and that only in cases of persons of the very first rank.

Being on this occasion, as on many others, wholly unacquainted with the necessary facts, I had unthinkingly rushed into an error at which Mr. Malone has levelled his envenomed shaft with his usual rancour.

On one of the documents relative to Shakespeare and Ireland I inserted a rude pen-and-ink drawing of the armorial bearings of our bard and those of the Ireland family, which I joined together with a chain, inserting these words in the centre:

 

Never to part

but in death

 

Which trivial circumstance gave rise to the attempt at an heraldic achievement. As sir Is**c H**rd and Mr. T*wns*nd were frequent visitants in Norfolk Street, they suggested to Mr. Samuel Ireland, on account of the apparent connexion between the families of Shakespeare and Ireland, that a junction of the two Coats of Arms should take place; and that Mr. S. Ireland ought to couple on his own shield the bearings of Shakespeare. To give an adequate idea of my feelings on this occasion is utterly impossible.

Having heard it asserted that the arms of the Ireland family, which consist of six fleurs de lis, upon a ground gules, were gained at the ever-memorable battle of Agincourt, I wished if possible to execute the original grant, and for that purpose called on Mr. Thane; to whom I mentioned a supposition that such a document was in existence, with the signature of Henry the Fifth.

Upon hearing which, Mr. Thane said that such a document would be a matter of great curiosity, as no signature of that monarch had been discovered. I made several attempts to compass this point, but found the execution too arduous: and fearing also that it might be discovered if not properly managed, I abandoned the idea; fully aware that the disclosure of one fabrication, at that stage of the business, must have infallibly overthrown the Shakespearian mass already produced.

A bold document, executed by myself to substantiate my claim to my own productions, was a supposed deed of gift from Shakespeare to master William-Henry Ireland. In this instrument, which was engrossed on parchment, and regularly sealed, like the foregoing law documents, I accounted for the friendship that subsisted between our bard and Ireland, by stating that Shakespeare’s life had been saved by the exertions of my ancestor, when, being in a boat upon the river Thames, through the intoxication of the watermen, the bark was unfortunately upset. For this service the bequests contained in the deed were supposed to have been made.

In addition to the deed of gift, I ventured to make the following assertion, which I conceived would infallibly preclude an attempt to deprive me of my own productions by transferring them to any descendant of Shakespeare who might be disposed to urge a claim.

I informed Mr. Samuel Ireland, that, on research being made among the family papers of the unknown Mr. H, he had discovered documents tending to prove that I was the direct descendant of the William-Henry Ireland to whom the bequest was made in the deed of gift; and that consequently he no longer regarded my possession of the manuscripts as a favour, but looked upon them as my own right by descent.

This was not, however, the last law document which I deemed necessary; and in consequence produced the law instrument which will occupy the following head, and which was fabricated very shortly after the deed of gift, in order to account for a very material objection constantly raised in opposition to the validity of the manuscripts.

Notwithstanding Mr. Malone has so amply expatiated on the various bequests contained in this fabricated document, he has nevertheless totally mistaken the real purport for which the instrument was composed, and which I shall now proceed to declare.

As I had, with Mr. Talbot, adopted the letter H as the initial of my friend’s surname, it was instantly conjectured that his name must be Heminges, and that he was the representative of the person bearing that name who was so closely connected with our bard. Yet it still remained unceasingly a matter of astonishment that this gentleman should desire so scrupulously to conceal his name, and not avow himself to be the original possessor of the papers.

At once to still surmises on this score, was the law document now under consideration produced; for the inference which I looked would be drawn from it was, that the ancestors of my friend (now concluded to be a Heminges) had not discharged the bequests made in this deed; and that, in consequence, my friend was averse from casting an odium on them, and of affixing an implied stigma on himself, by a disclosure of his name and connexions.

Besides these conclusions, which tended to account satisfactorily for the rigid silence of the supposed original proprietor of the manuscripts, it was also conjectured, that to the care of the same Heminges the deed of gift to Ireland had been entrusted; the clauses of which he had been equally dilatory in fulfilling: so that the property originally left to the Ireland of the time of Shakespeare, having remained in the family of the Heminges for so long a period, was at length thus providentially restored to the lineal descendant of him who had saved our poet’s life, by the existing representative of his supposed nefarious ancestor.

I shall now pass over a considerable period of time, during which my mind was unceasingly harassed by the constant reproaches of Mr. Ireland (who was then regarded in the light of the fabricator of the papers), and the importunate interrogatories of his friends; who stated, that it was a duty incumbent on me to give up the name of any unknown friend, in order to clear my father’s character from the odium which was so unjustly heaped upon it.

Having no name to bring forward, I of course evaded these reiterated entreaties by a statement of the grounds upon which the papers had originally fallen into my hands, and the manner in which Mr. Samuel Ireland had embarked in the publication of them. This, however, was not sufficient: the clamour increased daily; and a committee of several gentlemen was called to investigate the matter, and hear my answers, publicly delivered, to every interrogatory that might be put.

Mr. Talbot, who had also forwarded the letter before mentioned to Mr. Ireland, joining in my account of the discovery of the manuscripts (as agreed between us), was at this period written to by Mr. Ireland in a peremptory manner, in order to his forwarding from Dublin the correct statement of every circumstance, together with the supposed concealed gentleman’s name, place of abode, &c.

To such applications, however, Mr. Talbot continued silent, leaving everything to myself (having been sufficiently harassed by the part he had formerly taken), in order as he conceived to befriend me, without having any other motive whatsoever in view.

At this first meeting of the gentlemen committee appointed to canvass the whole production of the Shakespearian mass, I was of course present; when a regular series of questions were put to me; to each of which I replied by adhering to the story first delivered to the public. It was then demanded of me whether I would make oath, “that, to the best of my knowledge and belief (from every circumstance I knew respecting the discovery of the papers), they were genuine manuscripts from the pen of Shakespeare.”

To this interrogatory I made the following reply: “It is stated that the present committee is appointed to investigate Mr. Samuel Ireland’s concern in the business, and ease him from the calumnies which are heaped upon his head; I therefore will make oath that he received the papers from me as Shakspeare’s, and knows nothing whatsoever concerning their origin, or the source from whence they came.” Such was the purport of the business transacted during the first meeting.

At the second investigation I was also present; when Mr. Montague Talbot’s letter to Mr. Ireland, giving the detail of the discovery of the papers at Mr. H’s, was read aloud, as well as the copies of such communications as had been made to Mr. Talbot in Dublin, by Mr. Ireland, since his receipt of the above, of which Mr. Ireland had kept copies.

Mr. Talbot’s silence having been much reprobated by the gentlemen present, recourse was again had to me; when numerous propositions were made and interrogatories put; to all of which I replied as usual; stating, that my solemn oath compelled me never to reveal the name of the donor of the manuscripts, unless I had his previous permission to cancel the obligation by which I had so bound myself.

The late Governor FR*NKL*N was one of the persons appointed to attend these committees. Having heard me so peremptorily insist on the obligation of an oath, he arose from his seat, and, taking a Bible from his pocket, proceeded to quote several passages from Holy Writ, in order to prove that no son being under age was called upon to adhere to an oath, when the character of his parent was implicated by his so doing.

I cannot now call to mind the particular verses read aloud by the above gentleman on that occasion; but I well remember that the generality of his auditors regarded his conduct rather as the impulse of passion, than the offspring of cool reason and common sense.

It was, I believe, at the second meeting of the committee above mentioned that it was proposed to me to deliver into the hands of my supposed unknown friend a list of the names of several gentlemen, in order that he might, if he should think fit, select two persons to whom he would confide every fact respecting himself and the manuscripts. To this proposition I assented; when several names were committed to paper, and delivered into my hands, in order to be given to the unknown Mr. H a future day being then appointed for receiving his answer.

This proposition was made under the following presumption; that, although the supposed unknown gentleman might not be prevailed upon, by the two persons who should attend him, to make himself publicly known; yet that they, being individuals of respectability and fortune, might, upon ascertaining the facts, declare their opinions solemnly to the world, according to the statement that should be laid before them, and the proofs adduced; which would not only establish or invalidate the papers, but also free Mr. Ireland from any invidious remark which the world might otherwise be disposed to make on his connexion with the fabricator of the manuscripts.

As my mind was at this period a prey to the most agonising disquietudes, I debated within myself whether it would not be preferable to reveal the whole transaction to such two gentlemen as I chose to select, and consult with them as to the line of conduct it was most incumbent upon me to pursue, rather than longer remain in that state of dreadful anxiety, which rendered my existence burdensome to me.

Having at length made up my mind to brave the worst, I affixed a mark opposite those gentlemen names from whom I had the least cause to expect harsh conduct on making my confession; and, on the day appointed, I delivered in the list to the committee, with the two names so selected by myself; at which all the gentlemen appeared perfectly well satisfied: and a fourth day was in consequence named, it being agreed, that, during the intervening period, the persons so selected by me should be applied to, in order to know whether or not they were willing to become depositories of the great secret.

It is here requisite to mention, that the names of the gentlemen so chosen have now altogether escaped my memory.

On the appointed day the committee again assembled; when it was declared the gentlemen whom I had chosen had declined the honour intended them, and refused to interfere in the business. A long altercation ensued; after which I informed the company, that, if Mr. Albany Wallis (who was then present) would take upon himself the charge of the secret, I did not doubt that I could prevail upon my friend to confide the whole matter to him.

Mr. Wallis having acceded to this proposal, I acquainted the committee that I should take the earliest opportunity of persuading my friend to comply with my wishes; after which I would communicate to Mr. Albany Wallis the day and hour when he might expect Mr. H to make the discovery so long and ardently called for by the public.

Having summoned sufficient resolution, I repaired to Mr. Albany Wallis on the second day after the above meeting of the committee, when I explicitly detailed to that gentleman every circumstance attending my fabrication of the Shakespearian manuscripts.

Mr. Wallis was infinitely astonished at the discovery, and immediately proceeded to inquire my reasons for embarking in the variety of papers produced; when I committed to paper, in the disguised hand, my explicit reply to all his interrogatories, with which he was fully satisfied.

At a subsequent meeting I delivered into Mr. Wallis’ hands the remains of my ink used in the fabrication, as also the plans of several plays, with various other documents, as collateral proofs of the veracity of my confession.

On consulting Mr. Wallis as to the steps most expedient for me to adopt, he requested me to continue silent as usual; and that, with respect to himself, he should evade any questionings which might be put to him upon the subject, by stating that it was his opinion, as a professional man, that the supposed gentleman was not exactly safe in committing his name to the public; and with regard to inquiries made respecting the validity of the papers, Mr. Wallis determined on maintaining the most rigid silence.

As Mr. Malone and his inveterate phalanx still continued their invidious aspersions against the character of Mr. Samuel Ireland, who was unceasingly paragraphed in the morning prints; and as my communication of every circumstance to Mr. Wallis did not tend to elucidate the mystery, notwithstanding Mr. Samuel Ireland’s frequent applications to that gentleman, Mr. Ireland again recurred to me; and I was, as before, subject to the unceasing and bitter reproof of himself and friends for still subjecting him to the ill natured suggestions of the world.

All my arguments in opposition to these reiterated complaining were vain; and about this period Mr. Samuel Ireland quitted London, in order to experience a degree of tranquillity with some old friends who had given him an invitation into Berkshire.

A short time after Mr. Samuel Ireland’s departure from London I received the following letter, the contents of which struck deep into my soul; and I from that period more bitterly cursed the fatal moment which involved me in a business fraught with misery to myself, and which had caused an incalculable degree of unhappiness to that being whom I had fondly hoped to gratify by the production of the manuscripts.

 

The letter from the father

It is now more than a week, my dear Sam, since I left London; and not a word or a line from you. In the situation, unsettled as you are, you cannot suppose but that my mind is much agitated, both on your account and that of the family.

I expected, according to your promise that you would certainly have written to me, and have pointed out what was your plan: and not only so, but your intentions with regard to the papers. I do assure you my state is truly wretched on both accounts. I have no rest, either night or day; which might be much alleviated by a more open and candid conduct on your side. Surely, if there is a person for whom you can for a moment feel, it must be for a parent who has never ceased to render you every comfort and attention, from your earliest moment of existence to the present.

I think you must sometimes reflect, and place yourself in imagination as at a future period of life, having a son and being in such a predicament as I stand at present; and then judging what must be your state of mind, and what must be mine at present.

I do not mean reproaches by this letter, but to assure you, that, if you cannot think me your friend, I fear you will be deceived in all friendships you may in future form. I do not recollect that any conduct of mine towards you has been other than that of a friend and companion, not that of a rigid or morose parent.

It is therefore doubly unnatural that I should be forced to apply for information through any channel whatsoever, when I ought to hear it voluntarily from yourself. You seem to be estranging yourself, not only from me, but from all your family and all my acquaintances. Reflect well what you do, and what determinations you make; for this is the moment that may in all probability render you comfortable in your future establishment and future situation, or make you an alien to happiness for ever.

I have heard of my situation with the world, as to the papers at Reading, from many gentlemen there; who all agree that my state is truly a pitiable one; and all seem to dread the event. I know not the nature of your oaths and engagements, nor does the world; but it is universally allowed, that no obligation should lead a parent into ruin.

If the papers are to be established as genuine, why delay to furnish me with the documents so lately promised? But I will say no more on the subject at present.

By a paragraph in The Sun of Thursday last, it should appear, that, though I am not in the secret, some persons are. The paragraph runs thus: “We are at length enabled to form a decisive opinion with regard to the manuscripts in the possession of Mr. Ireland, though motives of delicacy at present prevent us from rendering that opinion public.”

Pray give me a line by to-morrow’s post, as I am impatient to hear from you: and believe me your very sincere friend and affectionate father.

Samuel Ireland.

June 5th Sunday.

 

As in the above letter Mr. Ireland addresses me by the name of Sam, in order that no fresh mysteries may arise in the public mind, after my having stated that my names are William-Henry, I think it requisite to inform my readers that I had an elder brother baptized Samuel, after Mr. Ireland; who dying when young, the names William Henry, by which I was christened, were never adopted by Mr. Ireland, who rather chose to call me after his own name, I being then his only remaining male offspring.

The papers required by Mr. Ireland, and upon the promise of which he lays a stress in his letter, were numerous other documents, of which I had given in a list as existing among the supposed manuscripts, and which it was my full intention to have fabricated, in order to throw a greater degree of validity on the mass already produced had not the overthrow of the whole business ensued, and frustrated any further attempts.

The painful train of reflexions which occupied my thoughts in consequence of the letter just quoted, and the anxiety which pervaded Mr. Samuel Ireland’s mind, led me to have recourse to an expedient which the momentary pressure could alone have warranted.

Finding that no step could satisfy Mr. Ireland’s anxiety but the disclosure of the whole fact to himself, and fearful of confiding the same to his ear, I resolutely determined on quitting his mansion for ever, as my life was an absolute burden to me under existing circumstances; in addition to which, the very method required by Mr. Ireland to quiet his doubts (which was my publication of every fact relating to the manuscripts, as above stated) was, to make use of a trite adage, a remedy worse than the disease.

Having worked up my mind to the adoption of the above plan, I made a hasty package of such articles as I could conveniently place within a carriage; when, seizing the opportunity of all the family’s being from home, I dispatched one of the servants for a hackney coach, and bade adieu to that residence which a series of events, originating in no evil intention whatsoever, had for many months rendered painful to me.

Shortly after my precipitate retreat, Mr. Samuel Ireland returned to town, being infinitely astonished at the news of my departure from Norfolk Street. He immediately repaired to Mr. Albany Wallis, with whom I had had frequent interviews; but that gentleman, conformably to my request, concealed the place of my abode, and also preserved the most inviolable secrecy as to everything which bore the least relation to my confession respecting the manuscripts.

Upon one of Mr. Samuel Ireland’s attendances on that gentleman, the following message was left for me in writing; it having been previously determined that an affidavit should be drawn up, and sworn to, in order to exculpate Mr. Ireland from having had any concern whatsoever in fabricating the papers; which was the rumour after they were generally deemed fabrications by the world, although the precise fact had not at that period met the public view; being confined to Mr. Wallis, as before stated: “That I insist on having the affidavit drawn up by Sam, and signed and sworn before a magistrate, in order to its being sent to Talbot, and then to be laid before the public: and I likewise insist on having the remainder of the papers, so often promised me.”

As the only object I had in view was the total exculpation of Mr. Samuel Ireland from having been connected in the fabrication (Mr. Albany Wallis having given it as his decided opinion that no blame would attach itself to me, as a boy, for having written the manuscripts, whereas Mr. Ireland’s character, as a man in years, and established in the world, would suffer from the suggestion, as it would be inferred that the whole had been executed by him for the purpose of gain), I requested Mr. A. Wallis to draw out a proper affidavit, in order to my swearing to the same and its after insertion in the public prints; with which request Mr. Wallis willingly complied; when the following was the form of the oath to be administered on that occasion, as drawn out by the above gentleman.

 

Affidavit Drawn Out By A. Wallis, Esq.

In justice to my father, and to remove the odium under which he labours respecting the papers published by him as the manuscripts of Shakespeare, I do hereby solemnly declare, that they were given to him by me as the manuscripts of Shakespeare, and that he was totally ignorant and unacquainted with the source from whence they came, or with any matter relating to the same, or to any thing save what was told him by myself; and that he published them without any knowledge, or even the smallest intention of fraud or imposition, but under a firm belief and persuasion of their authenticity, as I had given him to understand they were so.

W. H. Ireland, January 17, 1796.

 

Although Mr. Albany Wallis conceived the above affidavit in every respect adequate to answer the end required, it was nevertheless deemed insufficient by Mr. Samuel Ireland; who still dwelt on the hardship of not being made a participator with Mr. Wallis in the fatal mystery respecting the manuscripts.

No arguments adduced by Mr. Wallis were sufficient to pacify Mr. Ireland on that head: and it was, I believe, solely on this account that the affidavit in question was never required to be sworn to by me, or inserted in the public newspapers, notwithstanding the reiterated entreaties of Mr. A. Wallis and myself on that head.

On a prior occasion, and to the best of my recollection during the meetings of the committees, several very urgent letters were forwarded by Mr. Ireland to Mr. Talbot (then in Dublin), in order to draw from him a similar confirmation by oath to that required of me by the committee: “That, to the best of his knowledge and belief, he thought the manuscripts the real productions of Shakespeare.”

These communications of course had no effect: after which the form of the request was changed, though tending precisely to the same purport, being fully explained thus: In one of the letters so dispatched to Mr. Talbot by Mr. S. Ireland, he requested to know whether Mr. Talbot had any objection to make an affidavit as to the truth of the contents of his letter forwarded to Mr. Ireland, in which he gave the account of the discovery of the manuscripts, as agreed upon between Mr. Talbot and myself.

In answer to this, Mr. Talbot replied, that, if I would first enter into the oath, he would also swear that no individual, except ourselves and the supposed Mr. H, knew the secret.

In this instance Mr. Talbot was perfectly secure, being well aware, that, as there was no such person in existence as Mr. H, I could not enter into an oath whereby I would have been guilty of perjury. Upon my consequent refusal, I need scarcely acid that all the blame was thrown upon me by Mr. Ireland: and upon several applications being afterwards made in order to Mr. Talbot’s singly entering into such an affidavit, he constantly refused; actuated, I conjecture, by similar motives to those which deterred me.

As every endeavour to calm Mr. Samuel Ireland’s mind proved futile, I consulted Mr. Albany Wallis on the expediency of dispatching a letter to him averring myself the author of the manuscripts, and referring him for further satisfaction to Mr. Albany Wallis: to which suggestion Mr. Wallis agreed; and I in consequence penned a very long epistle to Mr. Ireland, stating the whole transaction, and craving his pardon in the most submissive terms for the error I had committed and the trouble I had thus unintentionally caused him.

This communication, being approved of by Mr. Wallis, was immediately forwarded to Mr. Samuel Ireland for his perusal.

The effect produced by this letter was diametrically opposite to what Mr. Wallis had conjectured, although I was by no means astonished at the impression thereby made on Mr. Samuel Ireland’s mind; who instantly attended on Mr. Wallis, stating it as his firm belief that there was not a word of truth in my statement; that he still believed the papers genuine; that no set of men could have produced the mass of evidence then in his possession; and that with respect to my assuming the title of author of the manuscripts, he was as fully convinced as that he then had existence I never could have produced them.

It was in vain that Mr. Wallis argued the point, and endeavoured to convince Mr. Ireland that I had not deceived him by the confession in my letter: he would not be pacified, nor examine the similar hand-writing of the documents then in Mr. Wallis’ possession: and, still adhering to his own belief, he quitted Mr. Wallis, firmly maintaining that the manuscripts were indisputably the productions of William Shakespeare.

As the fact, when stated, would not be accredited by Mr. Samuel Ireland, I was at a loss what step should be taken; for he still maintained his former belief, and constantly demanded of me the manuscripts which had been promised as forthcoming previous to my confession of the whole transaction.

Thus circumstanced, I once more consulted Mr. Albany Wallis; giving it as my opinion that the only means of exculpating Mr. Samuel Ireland from any censure whatsoever, would be my publication of a pamphlet stating concisely every fact. With this opinion Mr. Wallis did not coincide; advising me rather to suffer the matter to die away than give such a testimony to the public.

What was to be done in this posture of affairs? Mr. Samuel Ireland still believed the papers genuine; he demanded the remainder, which had been promised; he exhorted me to confess the truth, which, though already made known, he would not believe; and, lastly, he peremptorily insisted on my clearing his character to the world from every aspersion which had been thrown upon it.

Tormented by the reflexion that whilst I remained silent my father’s character bore undeservedly an offensive stigma, and knowing no better mode to free him from censure than that which I had suggested, I determined to act in opposition to the advice of Mr. Wallis, and give to the world a concise statement of the facts.

No sooner was this resolution formed than I committed to paper, in the most laconic manner possible, the leading particulars of the fabrication, which were published, in a pamphlet consisting of forty-three pages, under the following title:

 

An

Authentic Account

of the

Shakespearian Manuscripts

By

W.H. Ireland.

 

Of the above publication, which was sold at one shilling, only five hundred copies were printed: and so rare have they now become, that a single impression of the pamphlet has been known to sell, in a sale-room, for the sum of one guinea.

The only copy now in my possession is deficient in one leaf; and for this very mutilated impression I was compelled to pay eighteen shillings; being given to understand, at the time of purchasing the same, that I was favoured in its sale at that price, because I was the author of the production.

After the publication of my pamphlet, it was boldly asserted, by all the believers in the manuscripts, that the individual who had written it could never have been the author of the language to be found throughout the Shakespearian productions. In answer to this, my reply is that the then unsettled state of my mind incapacitated me even from thinking coolly on any subject.

I may further add that I was not endeavouring to commit blank verse to paper: neither was it requisite for me to soar into the heaven of heavens, in order to give the world a plain unvarnished tale.

The pamphlet was the production of perturbed moments, and contained facts as repugnant to my feelings as they could be to the most strenuous advocate for the papers. With all its imperfections, let its object be remembered: it was committed to the press for the most laudable of purposes, to remove the odium which was unjustly heaped upon the innocent: and however I may have since been, by many, condemned for this procedure, I still conceive that it was the only method left me of compassing the desired end; and as such, my conscience does not upbraid me.

Some time after the publication of my pamphlet, Mr. Samuel Ireland still adhering to his former opinions, and being myself well acquainted with the objections raised by many against the style of my pamphlet, I forwarded a further explanatory epistle to Mr. Samuel Ireland, detailing every fact which might tend to undeceive him in his erroneous suggestions, and vindicating the contents of my publication, which had greatly exasperated him.

A portion of the letter alluded to, of which I retained a transcript, being applicable to the present topic, I shall insert under the ensuing head, that the reader may be enabled to form a truer judgement upon the subject.

Quotation from the second letter to Mr. Ireland.

That I have been guilty of a fault in giving you the manuscripts, I confess, and am sorry for it. But must at the same time assure you, that it was done without a bad intention, or even a thought of what would ensue.

As you have repeatedly stated that truth will find its basis; even so will your character, notwithstanding every malignant aspersion, soon appear unblemished in the eyes of the world.

I must also appeal to the above expression: and although the style of my pamphlet may, when compared with my Vortigern, Henry the Second, &c., appear to be the production of a different person, and for the present confirm the public in the opinion that I am not the author of the papers; yet, sir, I do most solemnly appeal to my God that a day must come when the contents of my pamphlet will be allowed; and thereby never-erring truth will find its basis.

I am extremely sorry you did not, before the publication of your book, inspect the papers which I left in Mr. Wallis’ possession, and which I now beg you will no longer delay examining, as they contain a similar account to that published in my pamphlet. I make this remark, as your statement throws a degree of mystery on the transaction, which may give the world an idea of some different and concealed statement being in the hands of Mr. Wallis.

A considerable time after the appearance of my confession, Mr. Samuel Ireland produced a pamphlet in vindication of his own character: in one part of which he insinuates that other documents were placed in the hands of Mr. A. Wallis of Norfolk Street than those mentioned by me. This statement induced me in my letter to request that Mr. Ireland would no longer delay to  satisfy himself on that head, as the casting of such a doubt upon the subject tended to invalidate the statement of facts given to the public in my pamphlet.

The particular words made use of by Mr. Ireland, in his Vindication, I cannot now call to mind, nor am I in possession of the work in question; but the sentence, I well recollect, was intended to convey the idea of an inexplicable mystery overhung the documents vested in the hands of Mr. A. Wallis.

 

Mr. Ireland’s Vindication to the

Critical Labours of Mr. Malone, 1796

By

Samuel Ireland

 

As William-Henry Ireland’s Confessions (1805) were not yet published, the father of the youth, Samuel Ireland, under the illusion that his son was innocent of Malone’s accusations, gives the following account: “Mr. Malone, of all writers, has the slightest pretentions to that majesterial character, he has lately assumed, and by virtue of which he undertakes not only to discuss, but to decide on literary questions, as well as to asperse the moral reputations of those, who differ from him in opinion. In the controversy upon the Shakespeare MSS., it would have been better reasoning, as well as more candid hostility, to have proved the imposture before he [Malone] proclaimed the impostor.”

In Samuel Ireland’s folio collection of Shakespearean manuscripts, he offers an introduction to the work: It may be expected, that something should be said by the editor, of the manner in which these papers came into his hands. He received them from his Son, Samuel William Henry Ireland, a young man, then under nineteen years of age, by whom the discovery was accidentally made at the house of a gentleman of considerable property.

Amongst a mass of familiar papers, the contracts between Shakespeare, Lowine and Condell, and the leaf granted by him and Hemynge to Michael Fraser, which was first found, were discovered and soon after the deed of gift to William Henry Ireland (described as the friend of Shakespeare, in consequence of his having saved his life on the river Thames, when in extreme danger of being drowned) and also the deed of trust to John Hemynge were discovered. In pursuing this research he was so fortunate as to discover some deeds very material to the interests of this gentleman, and such as established beyond all doubt, his title to a considerable property.

In return for this service, added to the consideration, that the young man bore the same name, and arms, with the person, who saved the life of Shakespeare the gentleman promised him everything relative to the subject that had been or should be found either in town or at his country house. At this house the principal part of the papers, with a great variety of books containing the MSS., notes and three MSS., plays, with part of another were discovered.

Fortified as he is with the opinion of the unprejudiced and the intelligent, the editor will not allow that it can be presumption in him to say, that he has no doubt of the truth and authenticity of that which he lays before the public.

Of this fact he is as fully satisfied, as he is with the honour that has been observed to him upon this subject. So circumstanced, he should not feel justified in importuning, or any way requesting a gentleman, to whom he is known only by obligation, to subject himself to the impertinence and licentiousness of literary curiosity and cavil, unless he should himself voluntarily come forward.

But this is not all. It was not till after the mass of papers received, became voluminous, that Mr. Ireland had any idea of printing them: he then applied for his permission so to do, and this was not obtained, but under the strongest injunction that his name should not appear. This injunction has through all the stages of this business been uniformly declared: and, as this gentleman has dealt most liberally with the editor, he can confidently say, that in his turn he has with equal openness and candour conducted himself towards the public, to whom immediately upon every communication made, everything has been submitted without reserve.

 

Shakespeare MSS.

In justice to my father, and to remove the reproach, under which he has innocently fallen, respecting the papers published by him as the MSS., of Shakespeare, I do hereby solemnly declare that they were given to him by me, as the genuine productions of Shakespeare, and that he was and is at this moment totally unacquainted with the source from whence they came, or with any circumstance concerning them, save what he was told by myself, and which he has declared in the preface to his publication. With this firm belief and conviction of their authenticity, founded on the credit he gave to me and my assurances, they were laid before the world. This will be further confirmed, when at some future period it may be judged expedient to disclose the means by which they were obtained.

Witness,

Albany Wallis

Thomas Trowsdale, Clerk to Messrs,

Wallis and Troward

S. W. H. Ireland, Jun. Norfolk Street, May 24, 1796.

 

I should not forget to state, that on the morning my pamphlet was published I forwarded a letter to Mr. Montague Talbot, expressive of the disquietudes I had suffered and the steps I had been compelled to adopt, and altogether exonerating him from the promise of secrecy made to me on a prior occasion. In the same communication I requested his pardon for the painful dilemma in which I had involved him, by requesting his participation in the story respecting the discovery of the papers.

To this letter Mr. M. Talbot wrote me a very friendly answer: nor can I close this last statement respecting that gentleman, without once more offering him my sincere thanks for the inviolable secrecy he preserved, and his generous interposition in my favour, whensoever he conceived that his assistance would prove beneficial to me.

In the Morning Chronicle was inserted one of the most sarcastic remarks that appeared during the whole of the Shakespearian controversy. The paragraph which contained it appeared immediately after W. H. Ireland’s confession of his being the writer of the manuscripts. It ran nearly as follows: “W. H. Ireland has come forward and announced himself author of the papers attributed by him to Shakespeare; which, if true, proves him to be a liar.”

Several months after the production of my explanatory pamphlet, Mr. Albany Wallis was given to understand that Mr. Samuel Ireland attributed to him all the blame which he attached to that publication, and that he was also desirous I should retract the whole of its contents. In consequence of this statement, and in order to justify his own conduct, Mr. Wallis dispatched a note, requesting to see me. I attended; and upon hearing Mr. Wallis’ detail of the affair, I instantly committed the following lines to paper, in justification of the conduct of that gentleman on the occasion.

As a proof of the persecuting spirit which was unceasingly displayed to my detriment, I may mention that the warm emotions of the heart were discarded by Mr. Ireland, who dreaded any connexion whatsoever with me; fearful lest the world should brand him with countenancing me, and thereby be led to infer that he had been secretly concerned in the fabrication of the manuscripts.

In the advertisement to the play of Henry the Second, published by Mr. Barker of Russell Street, appear, in italics, the following words of Mr. Samuel Ireland:

 

Quotation from Mr. Ireland’s Advertisement to Henry The Second.

That he (Mr. S. Ireland) has had no intercourse or communication with the cause of all this public and domestic misfortune for near three years; the period at which the party alluded to quitted his house; except one meeting, had at the request and in the presence of Mr. Albany Wallis of Norfolk Street.

It has been stated in the public prints, and I conjecture with truth, that two letters from the pen of Shakespeare were discovered some time since at Knole in Kent, among the papers of the Dorset family, written by our bard to the then Lord Chamberlain upon mere official business relative to theatrical matters. This circumstance has frequently led me to conjecture what would have proved the consequence supposing that my manuscripts had passed current and that upon comparison they had been found altogether dissimilar to the penmanship contained in the two letters in question. A second controversy would doubtless have proved the case,

 

When critics anew had vented all their rage,

And gall, in ebon streams, imbued the page.

 

I beg leave to premise, ere I proceed with the subject of this head, that I do not insert the following statement to sooth a self-complacence, nor because I have confidence in the physiognomical principles of Lavater. The anecdote (which is positively true) is given solely because of its singularity.

After having quitted my father’s house, I was frequently invited to Thompson’s, Esq., M. P. On one particular occasion he introduced me at dinner to a foreign gentleman, who had frequently heard of the Shakespearian fabrication, and who was a staunch adherent to the principles of Lavater the physiognomist.

Some time after the cloth was withdrawn, the above gentleman having riveted his eyes upon my face for a considerable time, at length replenished his glass, and, after drinking my health, addressed himself to Mr. Thompson, stating that he had carefully examined the character of my physiognomy, and that, although he could not from the principles of Lavater have precisely indicated the subject on which I had been occupied, he should nevertheless have known that some circumstance of an uncommon and public nature had for a length of time overpowered every other consideration in my mind.

A very early oppositionist to the validity of the fabricated manuscripts was the above Mr. Boaden, who, from being one of their most staunch supporters, suddenly shifted his ground, and in a letter addressed to Mr. George Steevens endeavoured to controvert what was at that stage of the business generally believed, that the manuscripts were from the pen of Shakespeare.

In pages 17 and 18 of his pamphlet, under the head Collations and Remarks, is the following paragraph; which proves that Mr. Boaden in his research went beyond Mr. Malone, as he there allows that the fabricator had referred to the edition of Lear in 1608. As to his statement with regard to the folio of 1623, he has not, however, proved himself so acute; that edition being then in my possession, and often referred to by me.

“The first circumstance I think it necessary to remark is, that diligent collation of the printed copies with the Lear just published, has enabled me to decide, that the writer of the manuscript at first used only the second folio edition, with such modern impressions as he might chance to possess, although, in the course of the play he acquires evidently a copy of Butter’s quarto, 1608, and uses it with so determined a preference over the folio, that he preserves its readings to the absolute injury of the sense of the passages.

The folio 1623 he does not appear to have seen. The first proof which is offered occurs in the bequest of Lear to Gonerill. The words, which we find in the folio:

 

and with champaines rich’d

With plenteous rivers

 

are in Mr. Ireland’s edition, and are not in the quarto.”

 

Shortly after the appearance of the above gentleman’s pamphlet, Mr. Wy*tt, who had frequently inspected the manuscripts, and entertained no doubts of their genuineness, published an answer to Mr. Boaden’s publication, under the following title: “A comparative Review of the Opinions of Mr. James Boaden (Editor of the Oracle), &c, in 1795, and of James Boaden, Esq. (Author of Fontainville Forest, &c.), in 1796: By a Friend to Consistency.”

One of the most strenuous and able advocates of the Shakespearian production, was Mr. W*bb, who, under the assumed appellation of Philalethes, gave a pamphlet to the world with the title Shakespeare’s Manuscripts, in the Possession of Mr. Ireland, examined, respecting the internal and external Evidences of their Authenticity.

Mr. Waldron, gentleman of the sock, having put on the consideration-cap of my lord Burleigh in the Critic, threw down his gauntlet, and boldly entered the lists with his brother commentators against the genuineness of my manuscripts. The pamphlet which this gentleman issued was entitled “Free Reflections on miscellaneous Papers and legal Instruments, under the Hand and Seal of William Shakespeare, in the Possession of Samuel Ireland, of Norfolk Street.” This publication was made the vehicle of a play called The Virgin Queen, intended as a continuation of Shakespeare’s Tempest, from the phrensied brain of Mr. Waldron.

As this gentleman’s production, however, is for argument unworthy of a name when compared with the colossal Inquiry of Mr. Malone, I shall leave Mr. Waldron and his Virgin Queen for his more redoubted friend, The hect’ring kill-cow Hercules.

Having, in the progress of the foregoing pages, very frequently adverted to the above elaborate work, produced for the purpose of overturning the whole Shakespearian fabric, I shall in the present instance content myself with a very few words upon the subject; as the able criticisms of Mr. George Chalmers have so fully substantiated the futility of Mr. Malone’s judgement upon every topic, his flimsy pretensions as an antiquary, and his absolute want of acquaintance with the language of the very period of Shakespeare, on which he has pretended to comment with so much ostentation.

From the perusal of Mr. Malone’s Inquiry, it must appear evident to the meanest capacity that the commentator never dreamed of an opponent, although he ventured to peep into the court of Apollo during his drowsy fit: for after his conclusions are drawn upon each topic of discussion, his pages are so conceitedly interlarded with “Let us no longer hear of this H. I trust we shall hear no more of that,” and an hundred etceteras of the same nature, that it should appear as if Mr. Malone’s fiat were irrevocable; whereas, from the perusal of Mr. Chalmers’ Apology and Supplement, the facts in them exhibited and the just conclusions drawn, it is obvious that Malone was not only dreaming of Parnassus, but absolutely in a doze from the beginning to the termination of his boasted Inquiry.

 

General Apology for the Production of the Shakespearian Manuscripts.

I have been thus particular in every statement concerning my production of the papers, in order that it may be perfectly understood I did not act upon any premeditated plan of deception, but was as it were unwittingly led into the error; and when a man has yielded to falsehood in a single act, I believe it will invariably be found that he seeks a veil from detection in a continuation of the same impropriety.

Whatever has been my fault, my judges unquestionably have not been lenient, nor did they justly weigh the motive and inducement before they decided on the act.

It is full time the matter were placed in a just light; it is time I should cease to endure the blighting censure of Malignity rather than the mild and convincing reproof of Truth.

If we descend to the lowest court of judicature in this country, I believe it will appear that crimes are appreciated according to circumstances s that one man guilty of murder suffers the   judgement of the law in the forfeiture of his life, while another, who has equally bereaved a fellow being of existence, is permitted to re-enter society upon the payment of a shilling.

Upon these premises I shall ground my defence; and, under the following heads, endeavour to place my offence in that point of view in which every man would wish his own conduct to be regarded.

 

1st, I did not intend injury to any one.

In the course of the preceding pages I have given a full statement of the fact that urged me to the production of that instrument, which was no other than a fervent desire I had to afford satisfaction to Mr. Samuel Ireland. I had then no idea of producing any other document: as a convincing proof of which, nearly three weeks elapsed ere I gave into Mr. Ireland’s hand the profession of faith. Had I followed any premeditated plan, I should have taken special care to have had a sufficient quantity of the manuscripts ready for delivery; whereas every paper given was composed upon the spur of the moment. I will grant that vanity had a share in the business; but had no fuel been heaped upon the fire, the short-lived flame would have died away: and even so must it at any time have proved with my poor attempt to imitate the style of the most sublime genius that has ever graced this or any other country, had not the encomiums lavished on my productions constantly hurried me on in the track of literary falsehood. How then stands the account? I began the fabrication in the belief that by an innocent delusion I could please one whom I was anxious to gratify, and the persuasion (which I believe will be allowed not unnatural to a youth) that, if the deception were even exposed, the boldness of the attempt would have gained me praise for my ingenuity rather than censure for my deceit. May it not therefore be concluded that I was not instigated by a desire to injure any one?

 

2dly, I really injured no one.

Under this head I must first state that the manuscripts were produced as the handwriting of Shakespeare. Now even if we for a moment grant that the penmanship had deceived, yet there is still an important question to be decided: was the language competent to deceive the public? I answer unhesitatingly that it was not: consequently credence should not have been yielded by the believers so lightly, on the mere external appearance of the papers: they should have maturely considered the internal evidence; and then, as the spurious composition must have exposed itself, they would not have been deceived, and of consequence their mental faculties would not have been imposed upon.

I will lay no stress upon the story delivered by me to Mr. Ireland, and the concealment of the supposed gentleman; I will not speak of the redundancy of letters to be found in the spelling, which has employed the erudite pens of Messrs. Malone, Waldron, Boaden, &c, &c., but I will bring a stronger fact to bear me out; for it is stated in the Inquiry, published by Mr. Malone, that the forgery was palpable to the meanest capacity, and that the flimsy contrivance was to be seen through at the first glance. If so, I can have done no injury to any living creature; for that which in itself was not capable of deceiving any one, cannot perhaps, strictly speaking, be deemed a forgery: neither was it any injury to the reputation of Shakespeare as a poet. Now the former believers in the manuscripts being perfectly satisfied in their own minds, until Mr. Malone chose to inform them that they knew nothing about the matter, I do aver that it is at the said Mr. Malone they should level their shafts; as I could not have injured them; having, according to Mr. Malone, committed no forgery. Thus then I reason: Those who inspected the papers, with very few exceptions, were delighted on viewing them; consequently they received no injury. As to the individuals who did not think fit to view them, they can certainly have no cause for complaint, as their wits were not hoodwinked by the deception; which was, in fact, the only injury to be sustained.

 

3dly, I did not produce the papers from any pecuniary motives.

As extravagance or cupidity are the usual incentives to the acquirement of wealth, and as gold is the mighty touchstone of consciences in the present day, I shall content myself, in the first instance, with proving that I was then neither extravagant nor avaricious. Every necessary that was requisite to existence was procured me by Mr. Ireland; and, as far as he deemed it requisite, I was encouraged in my pursuit after old books, &c., as he would frequently state his satisfaction on witnessing my expenditure of money in those pursuits, rather than in the frequenting of company. Green in years, I experienced no incitements to dissoluteness; and the hours allotted for my attendance at chambers (being from ten till three, and from five till eight) left me, indeed, little time for any plans of pleasure; in addition to which, I was sufficiently engaged in the execution of the manuscripts. Thus far on the score of extravagance. With regard to cupidity: if such had been my motive, why did I not exact from Mr. S. Ireland certain stipulations? Why did I not, on the production of the first documents, accept the offer of some of his valuable books, for I was a lover of such property? why was I contented with the sum of ninety pounds for the Vortigern, when four hundred and three had been actually received for my sole benefit? And, lastly, why did I give everything to Mr. Ireland, without any reservation to myself, when I constantly heard it affirmed that the papers, if published, would prove a source of incalculable benefit ? On the contrary, as before stated, I was ever averse to the publication of the manuscripts; being fully aware that such was the only step which would throw a degree of infamy on the business, as the receipt of money would stamp it a pecuniary transaction. After these home facts, I trust it must be candidly confessed on all hands, that I did not produce the papers from any pecuniary motives.

 

4thly, I was by no means benefited by the papers.

In addition to the facts stated, respecting what appertains to pecuniary considerations, I must further allege, that, when the manuscripts were disbelieved, and that the most pointed aspersions were thrown out against Mr. Ireland’s character, I had to encounter all the opprobrium which he and his friends chose to lavish upon me because I would not, because I could not, give the name of an original donor of the manuscripts. It was in vain I argued that I was bound on oath to preserve the secret inviolable, and recalled to Mr. Ireland’s recollection the terms on which he willingly undertook to publish the papers: every representation proved ineffectual: his character, he affirmed, was called in question, it was in my power to extricate him, and I refused to do so. Wearied at length with the persecutions I endured, I took the resolution of quitting Mr. S. Ireland’s house; which event took place ere I had attained my twentieth year: since which period I have had to struggle against every opposition, and without the assistance of a single shilling from my family. By this step I of course violated my indenture with the solicitor to whom I was articled: and it was indeed stated to me, by the late Albany Wallis, Esq., of Norfolk Street, that I should never make any progress in the law, as all persons would imagine that I might forge deeds at pleasure, and would consequently be fearful of intrusting papers to my care. Besides these circumstances, a train of events were consequent on my quitting Mr. Ireland’s mansion which have ever proved to me a source of the most painful contemplation. Let me now ask, what is the benefit I have received from the papers? The answer I shall leave to the breast of candour, and proceed to the following head.

 

5thly, The gentlemen who came to inspect the papers have themselves alone to blame for the variety of productions which came forth after the fictitious deed between Shakespeare and Fraser.

In treating of a variety of the papers produced, I have, in the preceding pages, fully demonstrated that the conversation and questions of persons well stored with anecdotes of the period of Elizabeth and James frequently gave the hint of subjects for my after employment. Here, therefore, I need say little on the topic: but, as in some sort connected with it, I shall note another instance of Mr. Malone’s gross misconception and disgustingly ostentatious egotism; not to prove Mr. Malone’s incapacity as a general critic; this Mr. Chalmers has already done most completely; but because his error at this time is on a point to which it is impossible that any person except myself can speak with positiveness. In Mr. Malone’s elaborate Inquiry he has named certain works which the forger of the papers, he states, must have had recourse to; and in page 117, speaking of the spelling of Shakespeare’s name to the receipt for playing before lord Leicester, he very modestly, and with sweet apologetic compunction, says, “Mr. Steevens and myself have most innocently led the fabricator of all these novelties into a lamentable error.” Now it happens, very unfortunately for Mr. Malone that most of the books which he states to have been perused by the forger were unknown to me, save by name, and many not even thus. And with respect to Mr. Steevens and himself, I must beg leave to acquaint the commentator that I have in general found his notes so contemptible, and (after Mr. Chalmers’ Apology for the Believers and Mr. Ritson’s Inquiry into his capability as an annotator) his research to be so very dubious, that I rather prefer reading the works of our immortal bard without his farrago of idle doubts and probabilities, than lose the author’s sense while rambling: in the annotator’s wilderness of nonsense.

Perhaps, indeed, if I had consulted the notes in question, and produced everything coincident with the conjectures therein contained, the papers might have stood some chance of praise from the commentator: at least the forger might, for the attention he had then evidently paid to My last edition of Shakespeare’s works. Having thus added another proof to the enormous bulk already extant of the incapacity of Mr. Malone as a commentator, I shall dismiss the subject by repeating the assertion made at the beginning of this article, that not infrequently I was incited to the production of papers by the casual information obtained from the conversation and queries of those persons inspecting the manuscripts who were conversant with the history of Shakespeare’s age.

 

6thly, Being scarcely seventeen years and a half old, my boyhood should have in some measure screened me from the malice of my persecutors.

In the introduction to these several heads of vindication I have asserted (what is, indeed, universally allowed) that when the atrocity or merit of a deed is to be decided upon, it is not enough to take the act itself into consideration: all its attendant circumstances (if I may be allowed so to speak) should likewise well be weighed. In the foregoing pages I have endeavoured clearly to inform the reader of the steps which progressively led me to the commission of that which has brought on me such heavy censure. I have done so for the purpose of proving that I was at no time impelled by a criminal motive: I trust I have effected this, and that from the candid mind at least the weighty part of my offence will by this statement be wiped away. Mr. Ritson has stated, with his usual acrimony, that every literary impostor deserves hanging as much as a Common felon. I do not, however, remember his specifying the age and intention of the fabricator. Had he been conversant with the process of my fabrication, he would perhaps have mitigated the punishment to transportation. However, should literary imposture be rendered cognisable to a criminal court of judicature, I fear many of our commentators would tremble for their own necks, and particularly if the law, as no doubt it would, should have regard to the offence of distorting the meaning of an author, or imposing on the world the fanciful suppositions of the commentator for the original language of the writer. With respect to Mr. Malone, he certainly was unacquainted with the person who fabricated the manuscripts on the publication of his Inquiry: he consequently was justifiable in conceiving the whole to be the production of some individuals of mature age for the express purpose of gain. His introduction, therefore, of the name of Lander’s, who was a man of science, and no boy, as well as of that of Psalmanazar was perfectly consistent. I cannot, however, discover any coincidence between my papers and poor dame Theodosia Ivy’s deed, who expressly forged an instrument in order to establish her right to property which did not belong to her. I cannot expect mercy from Mr. Malone; but I scarcely think that he would have troubled himself to make the researches contained in his Inquiry into my papers, had he known them to be the production of a boy of seventeen years of age. As I do not, however, intend to leave my case to the mercy of Mr. Malone, I candidly submit to a generous public, whether my age, and the causes leading to my fabrication of the papers, should not be taken into consideration, and whether I may not be acquitted of everything except boyish folly. I beg leave to state, that such was the light in which it was regarded by Albany Wallis, Esq., who stated it as his decided opinion that Mr. Malone and the public ought rather to pass the business over as a boyish frolic (such was his expression), than continually heap odium upon me as a daring and bold impostor.

 

7thly, The reason why I have been so persecuted.

Under this head I may perhaps give offence to some individuals whose good opinion I would fain deserve: at any rate I shall duly appreciate the liberality of the literary world by simply stating that the very points to be adduced in extenuation of my fault, are the very reasons which operate in their minds to vilify and upbraid me. I was a boy; consequently they were deceived by a boy, and the imposition practised on their intellectual faculties was therefore the more galling. On the contrary, had the papers been the production of a man of known science and learning, they then would have pardoned the abuse, because he would have been more on a level with themselves: and although they would have regarded him as a dangerous forger, they would have granted that he was a very clever man: whereas I have not only been vilified by the lovers of Greek and Latin as a bold fabricator, but even the smallest portion of praise, as to the language of the papers, has been scrupulously withheld; and that for no other reason than because I was a boy.